



1- 




C iH* «i THE , i 



Chicag o-Prashnottar 

OB 

Questions and Answers on Jainism for the 

Parliament of Religions held at 

Chicago U. S. A. in 1893. 

BY 

LATE fflAHAUUNI SHRIfflAT YIJYAHAHDSDRI. 

TRANSLATED & PUBLISHED 

BY 

SHEI ATMANAND JAIN PUSTAK PBACHARAK 
MANDAL, ROSHAN MOHALLA, AGRA. 



First Edition \ «o*o j Price One Shilling 

500 copies. J i»io. \ or 12 Annas 



Printed bj Pt, Khayali Bam Manager, Damodar Printing Works, A OB A. 



. A -££3/2 

r<itf 



89-915027 




B. CHUNNILAL PANNALAL JEWELLER, BOMBAY. 



PUBLISHER'S NOTE. 

This book was originally published in 1905 
with an introduction in Hindi by Lala Jaswant 
Eai Jaini of Lahore, and although the Hindi 
edition has met, in an ample, measure, the needs 
of the Hindi knowing public interested in the 
religion of the Jains, it has proved but of little 
use to English-educated men— more especially 
to the people of Chicago and other places in 
America interested in Jainism, at whose request 
and for whose benefit the book was written by the 
distinguished author on the occasion of the 
World's Parliament of religions at Chicago. 
Moreover, there is at present a growing desire 
among western scholars to know more of 
Jainism and its tenets, and to them the Hindi 
edition is of little use. In order to meet these 
requirements and to make known to the western 
world the eternal truths of Jainism which 
occupies a high place among the ancient reli- 
gions of the world, we have ventured, with the 
permission of the publisher of the Hindi edition, 
to bring out this English translation of the book 
and trust that it will be favorably (received by 
the public. 



II 

We are greatly indebted to Bab a Ivannoo 
Mai M. A. for the considerable trouble he has 
taken in translating this book from Hindi and 
to Babu Chand Mai, B. A, LL.B., Agra, for the 
pains taken by him in correcting the proofs. 

Our thanks are, in no little measure, due to 
Seth Chunnilal Pannalal Jeweller, Bombay, 
for the generious pecuniary help he has so 
kindly given us in bringing out this English 
edition of the book, 

Shri Atmanand Jain Pustak Pracharak Mandal, 

Roshan Mohalla } AGRA. 



Ill 

A sliort account of the life of Shrimat 

Vijayanan&suri-popularly known as 

Shri Atmaramji 

Twenty two years have gone by since the death 
of Shri Vijayanandsuri, the well-known Jain 
Sadhu of the Swetainber sect. He was born in 
the village of Lahara, District Ferozpur (Punjab) 
on the first of Chaitra Shukla in Yikram year 
1893. He w r as a Brahma Kshattriya by casle. His 
father's name was Ganeshchandra and mother's, 
Rupdevi. He lost his father in early childhood 
and was brought up by his mother. He was 
given in charge of Seth Jodhmal of Jira 
(Punjab) for education in Yikram year 1903. 

He studied Hindi and Arithmetic. At 
times he used to visit Sthanakvasi Sadhus of the 
place and began to study about religion. In 
Vikrama 1910 he was initiated as a Sthanakvasi 
Sadhu. His intellect was keen : he used to 
commit to memory 100 verses a day. He had learnt 
the Shastras from the Sthanakvasi Sadhus but he 
began to entertain doubts as regards the interpre- 
tation as given by them. Fortunately he began 
to study Sanskrit Grammar and other philoso- 
phical and logical works with a Pandit. 



IV 

He fearlessly gave up the Sthanakvasi doctrine 
and came to Ahmedabad in V. year 1932. He 
was initiated as a Swetamber Sadhu by Buddhi- 
vijayji, a Jain Sadhu of the place. In the 
V. year 1943, he went to Palitana, Kathiawar, 
and stayed there for four months during the 
rainy season. Here he was given the title of 
1 Acharya' by the Sangha ; and from that time he 
was called by the name of Shri Vijayanandsuri. 

Then he travelled on foot from Gujerat to 
the Punjab. During the travel he brought to 
light the hidden Jain Literature. The Jain 
Bhandars o£ different places of Rajputana were 
examined by him. He got many old important 
manuscripts fairly copied out. 

For many years he lived in the Punjab. His 
fame spread through the different parts of the 
country. Many people of other sects came 
and discussed with him on matters o£ religion. 
He answered their arguments in a mild, courteous 
and dispassionate manner. His tone was ins- 
piring, and the hearers were at times astonished 
at his pecular tact of answering the questions. 
His ideas were liberal. He was serene and 
calm of desposition. 



Many questions on Jainism were put to 
him by Dr. A. F. Rudolf Hoernele through 
Maganlal Dalpatram in the Vikram year 1945. Dr« 
Hoernele was greatly satisfied with the answers. 
He wrote to Maganlal in 1888 " Please convey 
to the latter (Muni Maharaj) the expression o£ 
my thanks for the great trouble he has taken to 
reply so promptly and so fully to my questions. 
His answers were satisfactory." In the intro- 
duction of the Upasakdasanga, which Dr. Hornele 
has edited and translated he writes " For some 
o£ this information I am indebted to Muni 
Maharaj Atmaramji, Anandvijayji, the well- 
known and highly respected Sadhu of the Jain 
Community throughout India and author of 
(among others) two very useful works in Hindi." 

In Vikram year 1949, he received an in- 
vitation from Chicago to attend 'the World's 
Parliament of Religions. On account of religious 
and personal restrictions he could not go, but 
he sent his representative, Mr. Virchand Raghav- 
ji Gandhi, B. A. to Chicago to represent Jainism 
at the Parliament. 

He was the author of a number of works in 



VI 

Hindi. The important works are as follows:— 
Tatwanirnaya Prasad (cF^j^jqsnCT^), Jaina 
Tatwadarsha (^cf^I^r), Agnantimir-bhasker 
(?RW wfclfwoi 1*^), Sainayktwa Shalyodhar (SR3I- 
^Ft^T5^SCR), and Chicago-Prasnottar (f^EFTift 

Many Jain temples were built in the Punjab 
by his teaching. About 15000 persons were con- 
verted to Jainism by his strenuous efforts. Many 
Pathshalas and Libraries were established by him 
in the districts of the Punjab and in different 
other parts of the country. 

Spending his life in doing good deeds he 
passed away from this world in Vikram year 
1953, Jyesta Shukla 13, in Gujranwala (Punjab). 
The event of his death was mysterious. At 
midnight he got up from bed and sat in the 
posture of Padmasana. He called his pupils 
before him and said to them i Oh, Now I go, 
Arhan V 

'Lives of great men all remind us 
We can make our lives sublime, 
And departing leave behind us 
Foot prints on the sands of time/ 

{ Longfellow.) 




THE SHRINE OF LATE MAHAMUNI 

SHRI ATMARAMJI GUJRANWALA (PUNJAB) 

V. 1953. 



^< ijwfa*R*tter?reT firm** imi 
( ^ ^ft^^ft ) 



( 2 ) 
Introduction. 

The following letter was received by Shri 
Shri Tapagachhacharya Nyayambhonidhi Shri- 
mat Vijayananda Suri, popularly known as Shri 
Atmaramji, through the Jain Association of 
India, Bombay. 

Worlds' Congress Auxiliary 

Committee on Religious Congress, 
Rev. John Henry Barrows D. D., 

• Chairman, 
Chicago U. S. A. November 16th 1892. 

2330 Michigan Ave. 
Mr. Atmaramji, 

Bombay, 
India. 
Please address me 
William Pipe, 

2330 Machigan Ave, 
Chicago, 

United States of America. 
Dear Sir, 

There will be mailed to you in the course of 
a week an appointment as a member of the Ad- 
visory Council of the Parliament of the Relegions 



( 3 ) 

to be held in Chicago in 1893. In the meantime 
the Chairman instructs me to ask you if you 
will kindly forward to me at your earliest con- 
venience two photographs of yourself and a 
short sketch of your life. These are to be 
used in preparing the illustrated account of re- 
presentatives of the great faiths of the world. 
Will you therefore give this matter your earnest 
consideration and forward to me as soon as 
possible what is requested ? Some other pictures 
and explanatory literature that would illustrate 
any feature of Hinduism would be^ much ap« 
predated. With fraternal greetings, 

I am, 

Faithfully and sincerely yours, 

William Pipe. 

A reply to this letter was sent by the Jains 
of Bombay through Mr. Vir Chand Raghavaji 
Gandhi B. A., M. R. A. S., in consultation with 
the Muniraj Atma Ramji. The purport of the 
reply was that the Muni Mahardj had received 
the letter and was highly pleased to hear of the 
undertaking about holding a Religious Parlia- 
ment at Chicago. It was also stated that the 
Muni Raj regretted that owing to oldage, reli- 



( 4 ) 

gious restrictions and some other private reasons 
he was unable to personally attend the Parlia- 
ment of religions in compliance with the invita- 
tion. As desired, two photos of the Muniraj 
and a short biographical account of him together 
with some other interesting photos were also 
sent, an acknowledgment for which was re- 
quested. 

To this letter the following reply was 
received. 

Chicago U. S. A. April 3rd, 1893 

Muni Atmaramji, 
9, Bank Street Fort, 

Presidency Mills Co. Ld. 

Reverend Sir, 

I am very much delighted to receive your 
acceptance of your appointment together with 
the photographs and the biography of your re- 
markable life. Is it not possible for you to 
attend the Parliament in person ? It would 
give us great pleasure to meet you. At any 
rate, will you not be able to prepare a paper 
which will convey to the occidental mind, a clear 
account of the Jain Faith, which you so honor- 
ably represent ? It will give us great pleasure 



( 5 ) 

and promote the ends of: the Parliament if you 
are able to render this service. 

I send you several copies of my second 
report. Hoping to hear from you soon and 
favorably, 1 remain with fraternal regards, 

Yours cordially, 
John Henry Barrows, 

Chairman, 
Committee on Religious Congress. 

A reply to the above letter was sent through 
Shah Magan Lai Dalpat Ram, acknowledging the 
receipt of the letter and intimating that, in com- 
pliance with the wishes expressed therein, the 
Muni Maharaj had undertaken toi write a con- 
tribution on the Jain Faith. 

The following is the reply received. 

Chicago U. S. A. June 12th 1893. 
My dear Sir, 

I am desired by the Rev, Dr. Barrows 
to make an immediate acknowledgment of your 
favour of May 13th. It is eminently to be de- 
sired that there should be present at the Parlia- 
ment of Religions, a learned representative of 
the Jain community. 

We are indeed sorry that there is no pros- 



( 6 ) 

pect of having the Muni Atmaramji with us and 
trust the community over which he presides will 
depute some one to represent. It is, I trust, 
needless for me to say that your delegate will be 
received by us in Chicago with every distinction, 
and during his stay here, will receive our 
hospitality in as great a measure as we are able 
to accord it. 1£ you therefore decide to send a 
representative, will you kindly cable the fact to 
me ? The paper which learned Muni is pre- 
paring, will indeed be very welcome and will be 
given a place in the programme in keeping with 
the high rank of its author. Although we here 
in Chicago are a long distance from you, the 
name of Muni Atmaramji is frequently alluded 
to in religious discussions. For the purpose of 
illustrating the volumes which are to record the 
proceedings of the Parliament of Religions I am 
in want of a few pictures to illustrate the rites 
and ceremonies of the Jain Faith. May I ask 
you to procure these for me (at any expense) 

and send at yonr earliest convenience. 

I am, 
Very truly yours, 
WILLIAM PIPE, 
Private Secretary. 



( 7 ) 

This letter was passed on by Muni Atma 
Ramji to the Jain Association, India, with the 
remarks that it would be well if the Jains at 
Bombay were to consider the matter of sending 
Vir Chand Raghavji Gandhi as a representative 
of Jain faith to the Parliament. He added that 
by his deputation as a delegate to the Parliament 
of the religions of the world he would be able 
to give publicity to the religion of the Jains to 
all those who did not know what Jainism and 
its tenets were, and that the course was calculat- 
ed to disseminate the truths of Jainism far and 
wide. This opinion of the Muniraj was accepted 
by the gentlemen of Bombay, because they 
implicitly believed in his words and were 
convinced that the opinion expressed by Muni- 
raj could never be against their scripture or 
prejudicial to them in any way, for they well 
knew that in the modern times there was none 
equal to him in the knowledge and scholarship 
of Jain religious literature. Having thus con- 
sidered the matter, the Jain Association o£ 
Bombay requested Mr. Vir Chand Gandhi to go 
as their delegate to Chicago. On this occasion 
at the request of Mr. Vir Chand Gandhi as well 
as that of Chicago committee on Religious Con- 



( 8 ) 

gress the Muniraj wrote this work in the form 
of questions and answers on Jainism. I venture 
to publish the work for the benefit of my brethren. 
As the book was specially written for the Chicago 
Parliament and contained answers to the ques- 
tions received from Chicago, it was aptly entitled 
the " Chicago Prashnotar L e.. Questions and 
Answers on Jainism for the Chicago Parliament 
of religions. The name and learning of the 
author of the book being universally known, it is 
needless for me to dilate on the merits of his 
books. Nor can 1 do justice to the task, even 
if I were to attempt it. How can I be considered 
qualified enough to do full justice to the merits 
of the works of an author about whom occidental 
scholars and savants have expressed such a high 
opinion ? The following is an extract in this 
connection from the English translation of 
Upasakdasang Sutra by iDr. A. F. Rodolph 
Hornell, Secretary of the Asiatic Society of 
Bengal. 

" In a third Appendix (No. Ill) I have put 
together some additional information, that I 
have been able to gather since publishing the 
several fasciculi. For some of this information, 



( 9 ) 

I am indebted to Muni Maharaj Atma Ramji, 
Anand Vijayji, the well-known and highly res- 
pected Sadhu of the Jain community throughout 
India, and author of (among others) two very 
useful works in Hindi, the Jaina Tattvadarshr. 
mentioned in note 276 and the Ajnana Timira 
Bhaskara. I was placed in communication with 
him through the kindness of Mr. Magan Lai 
Dalpat Ram. My only regret is that I had not 
the advantage of his invaluable assistance from 
the very beginning of my work. For some use- 
ful suggestions and corrections I am also indebted 
to Mr. Virchand R. Gandhi, the Honorary Sec- 
retary to the Jain Association of India." 

On the 21st page of "The World's Parlia- 
ment of Religions," published in London, there 
is a photo of the Muniji Maharaj bearing the 
following eulogy. 

" No man has so peculiarly indentified 
himself with the interests of the Jain Community 
as Muni Atmaramji. He is one of the noble 
bands sworn from the day of initiation to the 
end of life to work day and night for the high 
mission they have undertaken. He is the High 
priest of the Jain community and is recognised 



( 10 ) 

as the highest living authority on Jain Religion 
and literature by Oriental scholars." 

The above has also appeared at page 3 of 
the treatise entitled "Eulogies to holy places." 
Dr. Hoernell has written certain eulogistic verses 
in Sanskrit on Muniji in the beginning of his 
publication on Upasak Dasang Sutra, the trans- 
lation of which is given below : — 

"(1) Thou art like the sun in dispelling the 
black clouds of ignorance ; thou establishest the 
minds of others on the sea of nector of good and 
noble instructions ; thou cuttest asunder all 
knots of doubts ; thou art beyond the eighteen 
blemishes condemned by Jainism. Thou art 
unsurpassingly great in the knowledge of the 
spiritual lore of Jains and that thou art all-wise. 

(2) For the purpose of dispelling the ig- 
norance of all good men, thou hast written the 
works entitled "Agyan Timirbhaskar" and "Jain 
Tattvadarsha." 

(3 & 4). Master of bliss, glorious soul, 
Enjoyer of spiritual knowledge, great sage, 
O unfailing answerer of all my questions ; 
purified soul ! In recognition of the good thou 



( 11 ) 

hast done me, I dedicate this book to thee in all 
sincerety of feeling as a mark of my gratitude." 

The reader of the present work will find all 
necessary information regarding the following 
questions : — 

What is God ? What kind of God ought 
to be adored ? In what way do the Jains and 
in what way do the followers of other religions 
believe in God ? Whether God can be proved 
as the creator of the universe or no ? What is 
action and how is it internally and externally 
classified ? What bondages are caused by what 
actions and what are their fruits ? What is 
that which leads from one state of existence to 
another state of existence ? What connection is 
there between the soul and the actions ? Does 
the soul perform the actions itself or is led 
by some other force to perfom them ? Does 
the soul enjoy the fruits of its actions itself or 
is allowed by some other to enjoy them ? In 
what matters do all religions agree unanimously? 
Has the soul the power of becoming God or 
no ? Does the soul return to the world 
after liberation or no ? Whether or not 
is it possible for the world being depleted of 



( 12 ) 

living beings when there is a continuous streams 
of the souls going into liberation which prevents 
their return ? How is the transmigration of 
soul established ? How is the existence of soul 
proved ? What advantages are there in wor- 
shiping God and loving God, and how should 
this adoration be made ? What form of image- 
worship should be observed and why ? What 
connection between God and man do religions 
believe in ? What are the duties of an ascetic 
and what of a house-holder ? What are the 
prescribed characteristics of the spiritual and the 
worldly life ? What is the mecessity and ad- 
vantage of the study of various religious books, 
and what are the rules regulating such a study ? 
Is there an incarnation of God or no ? If so, 
whether the liberated soul of God catches any 
contamination by the process of incarnation ? 
Has or has not God any defects ? 

In addition to the above questions, the author 
has also discoursed on such topics as the re-puri- 
fication of a contaminated soul, "rules calculated 
to ward ofl the fear of death, the classes and cha- 
racteristics of religion etc. etc. 

In consideration of the subjects treated in 



( 13 ) 

in the book it would not be inappropriate if it is 
entitled " Tattvapun j " or collection of cardinal 
truths. 

This work after completion was handed 
over to Mr. Vir Chandra Gandhi, who by its 
aid created a thirst in the minds of the people 
at Chicago and other places for spiritual know- 
ledge to such an extent that he was again invited 
to America. The invitation was gladly accepted 
by Mr. Vir Chundra Gandhi who resolved to 
go there with his family. On the occasion of 
his departure, the spiritual-minded Jains of 
Bombay presented several addresses to him. 
For fear of space, the purport of only one of 
these addresses is given below ; — 
Dear brother Mr. Vir Chandra Raghav Gandhi. 

We, the members of the Shri Hem Chandra- 
charya Abhyas Society, have met together to 
tx press our feelings of joy and sorrow- joy at the 
thought that you are going to such a distant 
country for the dissimination of tenets of 
Jainism, and sorrow because we will be deprived 
of the assistance of such a useful member. 

Dear brother, at a time when there was 
very little education among our community, you 



( 14 ) 

passed the highest collegiate examinations and 
displayed too deep an interest in spiritual and 
worldy matter to be adequately spoken of. The 
strenuous eflorts you made in connection with 
the holy places of pilgrimage such as Shri Sat- 
runjaya and Samedshikhar etc., are highly com- 
mendable. 

In 1893 you went as a representative of 
Shri Muniraj Atmaramji on behalf of the Jain 
community to the Parliament of Religions in 
America. 

The Muniraj is one of those selfless men 
who are always devoted to the interests of the 
Jain community and who have pledged from the 
day of their initiation to the end of their lives to 
perpetually preaching the highest truths of 
Jainism. He is one of the greatest preachers 
of the Jain religion and scholars of its literature- 
the preacher and scholar whose premature death 
is mourned by the whole community-the equal of 
whom in erudition and theknowledgejof Jaina Sha~ 
stras is difficult to find to succeed him and whose 
holy and virtuous deeds will for ever be remem- 
bered with undying gratitude by the present and 
the coming generations. The speeches which 



( 15 ) 

you have delivered in America on Jain religion & 
philosphy have done immense good to us and 
our American brethren. It is very gratifying 
that on this occasion of your going for the second 
time in response to the invitation of our Ameri- 
can brethren, you are also taking your wife with 
you. Her resolve in going with you on this 
occasion justifies in its fullest sense the signifi- 
cance of the word " Sahcharni " a constant com- 
panion. 

In conclusion, dear brother, our prayer is 
that happiness and prosperity may attend you 
while you are abroad, that success may crown 
the mission which you have voluntarily under- 
taken, that blessings may be showered upon you 
and that you may achieve distinction. 



Gentlemen, it is my humble request that if 
there is any error in the book due to my short- 
comings or inadvertence or misprinting, it may 
kindly be corrected, and that I may be informed 
of the same so that I may correct it in the next 
edition. 

Jaswant Rai Jaini, 

Lahoreo 



( 16 ) 
CHICAGO PRASHNOTTARA. 

OR 

Questions and answers on Jainism for the Chicago 
Parliament of Religions. 

1. Salutation be to Him who is devoid o£ 
all blemishes and full of ail virtues whether He 
be Brahmd, Vishnu, Shiva or a Jina. 

2. Bhagavan, let you be what you are 
by name and condition in this or that period ; 
if you are the same entirely devoid of sin and 
contamination, let my reverence be to you. 

3. Heiwhom the Shaivaities adore as Shiva, 
the Vedantins as Brahma, the Buddhists as Bud- 
dha, the rationalistic Naiyayikas as creator, the 
learned Jainas as Arhat and the Mimansikas as 
Eternal Action : may such a one — the Crest — 
jewel (Supreme one) of the three worlds realise 
our hearts' desire. 

Q— (1) Has Ish vara or God any beginning ? 

A.— Godhead has no beginning because that 
which has a beginning has of necessity 
two causes-material and instrumental 
causes. Neither of these two causes can 



( 17 ) 

be established in regard to Godhead ergo 
Godhead is beginningless. Ishvara or God 
is nothing bat the attainment of the stage 
of liberation which souls have either with 
or without bodies attained in the im- 
memorial past or will obtain in the 
future. The state of liberation and God 
are identical. 

2. Q.— How have people come to believe that 
there is God ? 

A.— Almost all believers injGod have come to 
this belief by observing various types o£ 
the wonderful creation of the world which 
they say cannot but be attributed to a 
Being of infinite power who is the creator 
and called God. This argument has led 
people to believe that there is God but it 
is fallacious, because both sentient and 
insentient beings are potential with in- 
finite powers, which combining with 
each other by the operation of the five 
forces L e>, Time, Nature, Function, 
uninterrupted Activity and Motive power 
have been evolving and dissolving this 
variegated universe from eternity* 



( is ) 

This universe full of sentient and insentient 
beings has been in continuous manifes- 
tation and is therefore beginningless. 
Hence the argument proving the exis- 
tence of God as creator, falls to the 
ground, 

3. Q. — What do ancient scriptures say regard- 
ing the belief in God ? 

A. — The Jain scriptures declare the Tirthan- 
karas, who, free from eighteen short-com- 
ings, have attained liberation in their bodies 
and the Siddhas or the perfect who have 
attained that liberation after the dissolu- 
tion of their bodies, to be God or 
Ishvara. 

These stages of liberation with and without 
bodies are called Ishvara, The ancient 
Sankhya scripture does not believe in 
God. The modern Sankhya doctrine 
designated Seshvaravadi declares Maha- 
deo to be God* The followers of Jaimani's 
doctrine donot believe in God. The 
followers of Uttarmimfinsa i.e. the Ve- 
. dantic doctrine, believe in panthesim or 



( 19 ) 

the doctrine of regarding all that is ia 
the world to be God. The followers of: 
Nyaya and Vaisheshik doctrines believe 
in God who is One, Omnipresent, eternal, 
an everlasting abode of wisdom, omnis- 
cient, the dispenser of the fruits of the 
good and bad actions of beings and who 
consigns them to hell and heaven. 

The followers of Budhism believe in a God 
who is the preacher of their four eternal 
truths viz., existence of Sorrow or Misery, 
cause of suffering, cessation of sorrow 
and the path that leads to that cessation, 
and who incarnates himself in the 
world whenever his teaching is neg- 
lected. 

4. Q. — What do reasoning and scriptures say 
in regard to the existence of God ? 

A. — The reasoning in establishing the existence 
of God is simply this. There are two 
kinds of words or expressions simple and 
compound. The examples of simple 
words are pot, cloth, soul, virtue, merit, 
sin, liberation, spirit, and those of com- 



( 20 ) 

pound words are cows' horns, buffaloes' 
horns, Raja's son, or hare's horns, man's 
horns, barren woman's son. The thing 
denoted by a simple word necessarily 
exists while the thing or things de- 
noted by a compound word or expres- 
sion may or may not exist. Ishvara 
or God is a simple word ; hence it neces- 
sarily exists. * 

As regards the view of the scriptures, the 
Jain Shastras hold that their Arhantas 
who have become Siddhas are ; Gods. 

The Buddhists consider Buddha to be their 
God* The followers of Nyaya and Vai- 
sheshik doctrine consider Shiva to be 
God and the Vedas consider the manifest- 
ed creation to be the God. 



* Notjb. — Just as pot etc., the word " Ishvara" is a simple word, 
fcavingi meaning, derivation and existence. If it is 
meaningless it can have no derivation, nor can it be cor- 
rect just as the words Dith &c. The word " Ishvara" is 
not like these words ; it has therefore meaning. If it 
has no derivation it cannot have any meaning though it 
is correct just as Dith &c« If a compound word has a 
derivation, it cannot have a pure meaning just as the 
words Khari-Vishana (horns of an ass), 



< 21 ) 

5. Q.— What proof is there that God is the 

creator and the protector of the world ? 

A, — There is no direct or indirect proof estab- 
lishing that God is the creator and pro- 
tector of this world. 

6. Q. — What fallacy is there in believing that 

Ishvara is the creator of the world and 
of all things ? 

A. — There are several fallacies in maintaining 
this view. 

7. Q. — Yours indeed is a curious statement. 

I have never heard that there is any 
fallacy in maintaining that God is the 
creator of the world. Please point cut 
the fallacy in the view. 

A. — Friend, tell me what sort of God you 
believe in, as the creator of the world. 

8. Q. — Are there many kinds of Ishvara 

(God) ? 

A. — Do you not know that they believe 
in two kinds of God. One kind of God 
existed before the creation ; there was no 
other material cause or being then. 



( 22 ) 

There was only one pure, intelligent, and 
blissful existence. This is what one 
class of people believe in. The other class 
believe in the beginninglessness or eter- 
nal existence of God pure, intelligent and 
of blissful existence, soul, atom, space, 
time, directions or quarters, (altogether 
nine substances) &c. of which the 
universe is made up. Both these exis- 
tences are believed to be eternal. Which 
of these two views about God do you 
hold ? 

9. Q. — I hold the first view about God because 
the Yedas and the other scriptures declare 
thus.* 



* NOTE.-— From this spirit emaDated Ether ; from ether emanated air; 
from air, fire ; from fire, water ; from water, earth ; from 
earth, herbs ; from herbs, food ; from food, semen ; from 
semen, man ; the man is thus made up of food and fluid. 
Tattriaya Sakha. 

O dear, He alone was in the beginning-one without 
a second ; He saw and the multifarious beings were 
born* Chandogya Upanishad. 

Neither was it nor was it not ; nor was it existent 
nor non-existent &c. &c. Rigveda. 

Atma alone was in the beginning-not anything else. 
It saw and the beings were borne. Aitraya Brahman. 



( ^ ) 

All these texts declare that there was 
only one God before the creation. There 
was then neither the world nor the creator 
of the world. There was only one pure 
existence u e. God. Christians and Mo- 
hammadans also hold this view. I too 
maintain the same opinion. 

A. — This view of yours renders the God 
imperfect. 

10. Q. — How is God rendered imperfect if he 

is said to be the creator of the universe ? 

A. — In the first place there is no material 
cause of the universe, hence it can never 
be created, for that which has no material 
cause can never come into existence just 
as the horns of an ass. 

11. Q. — God has created the universe out of 

His own power or nature. The ma- 
terial cause of the world is therefore 
God's power. 

A. (1) — Is the power of God separate or in- 
separate from him ? 



( 24 ) 

If it is separate from Him, is it sentient 
or insentient ? 

If insentient, then is it eternal or non- 
eternal ? 

If eternal, then your statement that there 
was only one God before the creation and 
no other existence, is like the statement of 
a mad man. It is self-contradictory. If 
you call that power non-eternal, then its 
material cause must be another power of 
God which must also have another power 
for its cause and so on and so forth. This 
is an argument in a circle and involves a 
fallacy. If you call it a sentient power, 
then is it eternal or non-eternal ? In 
both the cases the above two fallacies i. e. f 
self-contradiction and reasoning in a 
circle arise. If you consider this power 
non-separate from God, then all things 
are God. Every thing becomes God u e. 9 
good and evil ; heaven and hell ; merit 
and demerit ; virtue and vice ; the high 
and the low ; the king and the beggar ; 
the virtuous and the wicked ; the ruler 
and the ruled ; a good man and a thief ; 
the happy and the unhappy &c. &c. 



( 25 ) 

If that is the case, then instead of creat- 
ing the universe He has brought on Hi& 
own ruin. This is the first stigma on 
God, 

(2.) When Ishvara has become everything, then 
what is the use of his creating the Veda& 
and other scriptures and what is the use 
of reading them. This is another imper- 
fection of Him. 

(3.) If these Vedas and other scriptures were 
created for His own knowledge, then he 
must be without knowledge before crea- 
tion. This is the third fallacy. 

(4.) He is proved to have become impure from 
being pure and to have undergone the 
labour of creating the universe which is 
fruitless. This is the fourth fallacy. 

(5.) The fifth objection arises that no distinc- 
tion between good and evil is proved. 

(6.) The sixth objection is ; — Why has He in- 
volved Himself in this difficulty. In 
this way you impute many imperfection:- 
to God. 

12. Q. — -God is omnipotent ; hence he can 



( 26 ) 

produce the universe without any mate- 
rial cause. 

A.— This answer of yours cannot satisfy any 
wise man, because it is totally unsupport- 
ed by any proof. That which has no 
material cause can never come into exist- 
ence, for instance ass' horns. Argu- 
ment like this is liable to weaken, rather 
than strengthen your position. If you 
insist upon the things of your own ima- 
gination out of prejudice you can never 
be considered a critic. Your statement 
involves a fallacy of mutual dependance. 
If one pure existence of God not depend- 
ing upon any material cause before the 
creation be premised, then only can He 
be proved Omnipotent, and when He is 
proved Omnipotent He can be said to 
have created the universe without any 
material cause. Until one of these two 
propositions is established, the other can- 
not be proved. This is reasoning in a 
circle. The two propositions are either 
to prove the creator of the universe or to 
prove God Omnipotent* When He is 



( 27 ) 



V 



proved omnipotent, then can He be proved 
to have created the universe without any 
material cause. When He is proved to be 
the creator of the universe, then only can 
He be proved omnipotent. Is not this 
reasoning in a circle ? 

13. Q. — The existence of God is self-evident. 

Why do jou not consider Him as the 
creator of the universe ? 

A. — If the creation of the universe by God 
is proved self-evident, then none can 
have any dispute about it and our con- 
troversy about God may also cease because 
what is self evident admits of no argumen- 
tation. But that the presence of God 
cannot be known by direct perception, has 
been laid down in your Vedas.* 

This Yedic verse evidently shows that God 
cannot be cognised by any one. 

14. Q. — How has the world come into exis- 

tence without a creator ? This inferen- 
tial proof establishes that God is the 

* NOTE. — Without feet and hands, He walks and grasps, without 
eyes He sees, without ear, He hears ; He knows the 
universe best but there is none in the universe who 
knows Him. He is called the primeval ancient Purusha. 



/ 28 ; 

creator of the world — Why do you not 
accept this ? 

A. — We shall refute this argument of yours 
when dealing with the other aspect of: 
God. Although it is not proved that 
there was only one God before the 
creation without any material causes, 
even then we proceed on and ask whe- 
ther these souls when created by God 
were Pure, (2) whether they were 
endowed with merits, (3) whether they 
were impregnated with sins, (4) whether 
they were mixed with virtue and sin 
together, (5) whether the} T had more sin 
and less virtue and (6) whether they 
had more virtue and less sin. 

If you maintain the first position, then all 
the souls in the world ought to be pure 
and all the injunctions of the scriptures 
regarding them ought to be futile. Be- 
sides, the author of these scriptures is> 
also proved to be unwise ; for it was 
useless to compose these scriptures for 
the guidance of the souls which were 
already pure. No sensible man washes 



10. 



( 29 ) 

a clean cloth ; if he does so, he is a fool. 
This shows that if these scriptures were 
put together for the guidance of pure 
souls, the author thereof was not a wise 

man. 

Q, — God created all the souls pure, but 
they, out of their own will, did good or 
bad actions. How is God to be blamed 
for this ? 

A fc — When Ishvara did not endow the souls 
with a power to do good or evil actions, 
how have they then come into possession 
of that power ? 

16. Q. — God has created all powers in the 
souls but He does not prompt them to do 
evil to which they are led of their own 
accord. Suppose a man gives his dear 
child a toy to play with but the child 
injures his eye with it, are the parents to 
blame for it ? Similarly God has given 
hands, feet, and other organs of actions 
to beings only for the performance of 
virtuous actions. If one did evil of his 
own accord ; is God to blame for it ? 



( 30 ) 

A.— simple-minded man, the example of a 
child which you have given is not correct 
because the parents of the child do not 
know that the toy they have given will 
be so used by him as to injure his eye. 
If the parents knew this they would 
never give the toy to the child. If they 
give it knowingly, they are not his parents 
but his enemies. 

Similarly according to your theory, God 
is to be regarded as our parent and we are 
all his children. If He knew that the man 
who has been given hands, feet, mind, 
and other senses, would use them so as 
to commit sins leading him to hell, He 
would not have created him. If He did 
not know this, He is proved to be devoid 
of wisdom and omniscience. If He knew 
this, the charge of His being our enemy 
is brought against Him. What was His 
object in getting so many men doing 
things which would lead them to hell ? 
God is proved to be unjust in as much as 
He has supplied man wherewithal to do 
sin, and thee punished him for doing so. 



( 31 ) 

God is thus proved to be unjust, parvi- 
scient, cruel and unwise. Since it would 
not be advisable to bring so many charges- 
against Him, it would be better to accept 
that God did not create sinless souls. 
This is an answer to your first propo- 
sition ; and as regards your Second pro- 
position, the refutation is as follows :— - 

If you say that God has created only 
virtuous souls, then the objection is, why 
are men born blind, lame, cripple, deaf, 
deformed, and also in low and penury- 
stricken families ? 

Certainly the after-effects of virtue do not 
make men miserable and starving for life 
and to be drudging for mouthf uls of food. 
Besides, how could God make the souls 
virtuous without their having done good 
deeds before. If He made them virtuous 
without their previous deeds, He might 
as well send them to heaven or give them 
salvation without their doing any virtu- 
ous deeds. When it was so easy, why 
did God create the difficulty of men un- 
dergoing such ordeals as the following in 



( 32 ) 

obedience to scriptural injunctions: — keep- 
ing fasts, abandonment of greed, passion 
and animosity, enrolment in the order of 
ascetics, anchorites, mendicants &c, ad- 
herence to the virtues of compassion, 
self control, charity, truthfulness, absti- 
nence from theft and the company of 
women. Does it not show that God is 
neither discreet nor wise ? 

As regards the 3rd objection, the answer 
is as follows : — 

If you say that God created the souls en- 
crusted with sin, then does it not show that 
the souls were charged with sins without 
having done them ? When the God 
Himself has ruined us, to whom else are 
we to represent our grievances to the effect 
that we have been charged with sin by 
God without our having committed them 
and soliciting his aid in keeping God from 
doing so. The unjust God who charges 
us with sins without our committing them 
ought never to be adored. If God had 
created all the souls encrusted with sin, 
a birth in the family of kings, ministers, 



( 33 ) 

order to attain heaven and salvation ;— 
military commanders, and millionares, 
healthy body excellent, form and person, 
respect at home, and fame abroad, en- 
joyment of all the five senses &c. &c. 
would be impossible. Therefore God has 
not created sinful men. 

A. — To the 4th proposition. — If you say that 
the souls were created half sinful and 
half virtuous, the statement is equally 
preposterous because all souls are not 
seen half happy and half miserable in the 
world. 

A. — To the 5th proposition. — This position 
too is not tenable in asmuch as it is not 
found that the majority of beings is happy 
and the minority miserable, on the other 
hand, the majority is found to be in 
misery and the minority in happiness. 
Under these circumstances, it is established 
that God could not create the souls 
in any condition ; ergo He could not be 
the creator. Was God unhappy before 
the creation, and happy after it ? 



( 34 ) 

17. Q. — God is always happy. He had no 
deficiency in order to make up which, He 
created this world. He creates the uni- 
verse in order to manifest His glory. 

A.— Was not the glory of God manifest before 
He created the universe ? If His glory 
was not manifest before the creation, God 
must be in a gloomy mood and anxious 
about the attainment of His desire and 
to manifest His glory. 

God must therefore be in misery. If He 
was miserable before the creation why 
did He remain idle and why did He not 
remove His misery by creating another 
universe before this universe. 

18. Q.— God has created the universe with the 
object that the souls may do virtuous 
deeds and attain unending happiness. 
He created the universe to do good to 
others. 

A. — If it is doing good to others to make them 
do good deeds and attain happiness, what 
act of goodness is His towards those 
who have gone to the hell after committ- 
ing sins ? 



( 35 ) 

19. Q. — Can God be called philanthropic by 

making the latter unhappy ? He would 
take them out of the hell and send them 
to heaven. 

A. — Why did He allow them to go to hell first ? 

20. Q.— It is God who makes men do virtuous 

or sinful deeds. They cannot do any- 
thing of themselves. Just as a puppet 
dancer makes puppets dance as he likes, 
so does God make people do what He 
wills. 

A — If it is not in the power of souls to do 
anything, they should not be responsible 
for good or bad results. If a master 
orders his servant to do anything and the 
servant does it in obedience to his order 
and the result turns out to be bad, 
would the master punish the servant for 
it ? No, never. Similarly if men do 
good or bad actions in obedience to God's 
orders they cannot be held responsible for 
their results. When men have not done 
good or bad actions, they cannot go to 
heaven or hell nor can they attain any 
of the four conditions of life such as 



( 36 ) 

(1) heaven (2) hell (3) human life and 
(4) animal, mineral and vegetable life. 
When there are no such four conditions 
of life there is no universe. When there 
is no universe there are no such scriptures 
as the Vedas, Puranas, Quran, Tauret, 
Jabur, Bible &e. When there are no 
scriptures, there are no religious teachers. 
When there are no religious teachers, 
there is no God. When there is no God 
there is universal void. How can this 
absurdity be dealt with ? 

21. Q.— This universe is like the show of a 
juggler aud God acts like a juggler. By 
the creation of this universe God simply 
amuses Himself by His tricks. There 
are no such things as heaven, hell, virtue 
and sin. 

A. — If God has created the world simply for 
His amusement, the results thereof ought 
to be simply like the effects of a juggler's 
performance. But in this world there 
are men who are sick, leprous, grief- 
stricken, penniless, infirm and extremely 
wretched wallowing in the depths of 



( 37 ) 

squalor and misery. The very sight o£ 
these persons evokes our compassion and 
excites our horripilation. Does not the 
sight of these miserable creatures move 
God with pity ? If God is not moved 
with pity, He cannot be God. The per- 
former of a trick is like a foolish child 
full of passion and animosity. If He is 
affected by passion and hatred He is 
full of all defects. When He is full of 
all defects He cannot be God. He can 
only be a worldly man. He who has 
passion and hatred cannot be omniscient 
and He who is not omniscient can never 
be called God. 
22. Q. — God rewards or punishes men according 
to their actions therefore He is not to 
blame. As one soweth so does one reap. 

A.- — Your statement proves that the world is 
beginningless and God is not its creator. 
Bravo ! you have undermined your own 
position yourself. You are coming to 
the position that whatever condition the 
living beings have in this life, are the 
results of their deeds in the previous life 



( 38 ) 

and what they were in the previous life, 
was the result of their actions in the 
one preceding it. In this way the chain 
goes back ad-infinitnm. This argument 
proves that the world is beginningless 
and that God is not its creator. 

23. Q. — I believe only in one supreme Brahma 

who is an ever existing reality 

A.— If there is only one Supreme Brahma of 
ever-existing reality then does it not 
follow from this that all these variegated 
phenomena such as pine tree, mango tree, 
sugar cane, palm tree &c &c are unreal? 

24. Q. — All this phenomenon is unreal. All 

that appears is unreal. Nothing more real 
than the appearance of silver in a mother 
of pearls (fish, shell). There is only one 
Supreme Brahma who is perpetually real. 
A,— Your statement does not point to your 
keen intelligence. There are three kinds 
of unrealities. One that is substantially 
untrue, the other which appears different 
from what it really is and the third which 
is indescribable unreality. Which of these 
unrealities do you believe in ? 



( 39 ) 

25. Q. — I do not believe in the first two kinds 
of unrealities. I believe in the third kind 
of unreality which is indescribable. The 
phenomena are indescribably unreal. 

A. — Please let me know first what you mean 
by the word indescribable. (1) Does it 
mean that the word does not denote any 
object ? (2) Does it mean that the object 
which the word denotes has no existence? 

The first position is not worth considering 
seriously because it is evidently proved 
that such things as trees &c do exist. 
As regards the 2nd position it has to be 
ascertained whether the knowledge of the 
object or the object itself which the word 
denotes does not exist. The first case is 
wrong because the knowledge of such 
objects as pine tree, mango tree, palm 
tree &c &c, is possessed by men. As 
regards the existence or non-existence of: 
the object itself it has again to be ascer- 
tained whether the positive or negative 
existence is meant. If you say that there 
is no positive existence of things and yet 
they appear, you will be driven on to the 



( 40 ) 

fallacy of Perverse Knowledge and this 
fallacy is held highly objectionable by those 
who believe in advaitism. If you say 
that objects are devoid of non-existence, 
then you come to their having a positive 
existence which involves the canon of Real 
Existence of phenomena. 
If you believe in Advaitism and also accept 
the statement involved in the above dogma 
of real existence you are directly against 
Advaitism which in that case can never 
be established. 
26. Q. — Objects have neither existence nor 
non-existence. 
A* — Do you accept the usual meanings of 
the terms existence and non-existence or 
attach some other meaning of your own 
to them. If you accept the usual sense 
of these terms you will have to admit 
that where a thing does not exist it is 
non-existent and when it exists it is not 
non-existent- These two propositions are 
contradictory. If you reject one you must 
admit the other. Here is no scope for ar 
indescribable unreality. If you attao 



( 41 ) 

your own meaning to these terms, the 
matter does not affect us because when the 
term and the object denoted by it appear 
in the artificial sense you have imposed 
on them the usual sense of: the word and 
the object denoted by it would never be 
absent. How would you then prove the 
phenomena to be indescribably unreal ? 
If the indescribable unreality is not proved, 
how can phenomena be proved unreal. 
Nor can only one Brahma be proved. 

27. Q. — I call that to be indescribable which is 
not visible. 
A. — Your position is highly self-contradic- 
tory. If the phenomena are not visible, 
why did you accept them as visible and 
having attributes in your former statement. 
If you ask what contradiction there is in 
accepting them as visible and having 
attributes, then your statement that what 
is not visible is indescribable would fall 
through. When the phenomena are not 
indescribable, then either they would be 
existing in form or non-existing in form* 
In accepting either of these two positions 



( 42 ) 

you will again be driven on to either o£ 
the two fallacies of "Perverse Knowledge" 
and "Real Existence" alluded to above* 
I ask you again whether your belief in 
holding the phenomena as indescribable is 
based on direct or indirect proof. The 
direct proof shows the phenomena as they 
appear *'. e., really existing. As are the 
objects, so is their cognition by direct 
proof and each object of the phenomena is 
existing in regard to its own form and 
non- existent in regard to other objects. 
All these objects existing separately from 
one another form what is called Prapan- 
chor Phenomena. This being the case how 
it is possible on the basis of direct evi- 
dence to prove the phenomena to be 
indescribable. 

28 # Q. — The direct evidence cannot rebut my 
former position on the other hand it 
strengthens it. If direct evidence were to 
show that the nature of one object does 
not exist in another object then it would 
weaken my position. 

The direct evidence is not of this nature 



( 43 ) 

as it does not show that the nature of one 
object does not exist in another object. 

A. — Your statement is untenable. You can- 
not have the knowledge of the true nature 
of an object without nagativing the nature 
of a different object in it. You can have 
an idea of blue colour only when you naga- 
tive in it yellow or other colours. When 
you become cognisant of the real nature o£ 
an object by direct proof, then only you 
can deny the existence of other objects 
therein. You cannot know the true nature 
of an object unless you realise the negation 
of another object therein. In fact to rea- 
lize the true nature of an object is to 
negative the existence of a different object 
in it. When the direct proof admits of 
both existence and non-existence of an 
object, the phenomena can never be proved 
real. When the phenomena cannot be 
proved real, the Supreme spirit who is 
only one without the second cannot be 
proved. If you considered the direct evi- 
dence proving only the existence of things 
you will also have to admit the existence 



( 44 ) 

of nescience just like the existence o£ 
knowledge. Your statement that Brahm 
is proved without nescience by direct evi- 
dence also shows the negation of nescience 
by the same proof. It being so, your state- 
ment that direct proof indicates only exis- 
tence and not non-existence is like the 
statement of a madman. Now as regards 
your indirect proof what is argued later 
on will repudiate it. My position is that 
the phenomena are not an illusion being 
opposed to unreality. What is opposed 
to unreality is real such as the soul. Si- 
milar is the case with the phenomena. 
Your argument relating to the cognition 
of things is opposed to the existence of 
Supreme being in asmuch as the Supreme 
spirit is not perceptible but at the same 
time not unreal. If you say that the 
supreme spirit is imperceptible then it is 
indescribable. If it is not indescribable, 
your position becomes untenable, because 
your expostulation is that there is no- 
thing else besides the Brahma and that the 
supreme Atman is invisible. In your form- 



(' 45 ) 

er argument you gave an example of a 
mother of pearl. That example is inap- 
plicable in asmuch as the mother of pearl 
is included in the phenomena which you 
consider to be unreal. An example 
ought to refer to a thing which is cap- 
able of being proved. It is not yet 
proved whether the existence of the 
mother of pearl is real or unreal. Such 
being the case you cannot give an ex- 
ample of it. Further I ask you whether 
the argument you put forward to prove 
the unreality of phenomena is included 
in the phenomena or not? If not included, 
is it real or unreal ? If real, then the 
phenomena too like your argument, are 
also real. If unreal, is it a void or an 
example of " Perverse knowledge" or 
something inexpressible ? The first two 
propositions are not conducive to what 
is to be proved ; they are just as the 
horns of a man or the silver in a mother 
of pearl. As regards the third statement 
relating to indescribability, it cannot in 
the first place be possibly thought of, 
then it cannot prove the point at issue. 



k 4 6 ) 

29. Q. — My proposition is true from a common 

sense view ; therefore it cannot be wrong 
and is calculated to prove its object 

A. — I ask you to let me know the form of 
this common sense view. The word Vya- 
vahara derived from its root means noth- 
ing else than knowledge. Whatever is 
real by means of knowledge is intrinsically 
real. This view proves the phenomena 
to be real. When the phenomena are real, 
it cannot be said that only one supreme 
Brahma without a second is real and all 
else unreal. If you say that the use o£ 
the word is true, I ask you whether the 
word is real or unreal. If you say that 
the word is real, then the phenomena are 
as well real as the word. If you say that 
the word is unreal, such words as Brahm 
&c cannot be real because that which is 
itself unreal cannot be the cause of any- 
thing that is real. 

30. Q. — Just as a false coin points to the tran- 

sactions in genuine coins, so does our 
view though false, point to the reality of 



( 47 ) 

the phenomena. It therefore proves it& 
object. 

A. — ! friend your statement makes your 
argument really false. All the fallacies 
pointed out in connection with the un- 
reality of fiie phenomena, would again 
arise here. If you argue that you do not 
consider your reasoning separate from the 
phenomena, your reasoning is certainly 
unreal like the phenomena and it cannot 
prove its point. What has been explained 
before does not prove the phenomena to 
be unreal, they are real like souls and 
your position that only one Brahma with- 
out a second is real and all else false, 
falls to the ground. 

31. Q. — It is declared in the Upanishads as 
well as stated by Anandagiri, the disciple 
of Shankara Swami in the third chapter 
of the " Shankara - dig-vijaya " that 
the Supreme spirit is the material 
cause of the universe. The material cause 
is that which transforms itself into effect. 
This shows that whatever there is in the 



( 48 ) 

universe is the transformation of the 
Supreme spirit. The universe thus being 
the form of the Supreme spirit, what 
objection is there that God is the creator 
of the universe ? 

A. — You are certainly the prince of atheists. 
Do you at all consider what you say ? 
Your statement shows your position to 
be atheistic. When the world is the 
transformation of the Supreme Being, 
then there are no such things as a sinner, 
a virtuous man, a sage, a fool, the heaven 
or the hell, a good man, or a thief, truth- 
ful or untruthful scriptures &c. &c. From 
this point of view there is no difference 
between a beef eater and a corn eater, no 
difference between an act of sexual inter- 
course with one's wife and that with 
one's other relatives, no difference be- 
tween an ascetic and an ass, because 
when God is the material cause of all 
things, the whole world is of one essence 
and form as there nothing else. 



r 49 > 

32. Q. — I believe in Brahma and Maya. What- 
ever arguments and theories you have 
propounded are the products of May&. 
Brahma is one ever lasting, conscious, 
blissful and pure existence. 

A. — 0! Believer in monism! the position 
which you have now taken up is extremely 
wrong. Is May& separate or non-separate 
from the Brahma ? If separate, is it sen- 
tient or insentient ? If insentient, is it 
eternal or transitory. If you say that it 
is eternal it uproots the monistic creed 
because when it is separate from God 
and is insentient and ever lasting it 
means that you have yourself admitted 
the truth of the dualistic theory and un- 
dermined that of the monistic doctrine. 
If you say that Maya is transitory even 
then you cannot do away with dualism, 
because whatever is perishable is an effect 
and an effect is another form of cause, and 
on this statement the material cause of 
Mava cannot be shown. If you say that 
the cause of the Ma\ais another Maya, 
you reason in a circle and the monistic 



( 50 ) 

theory remains unproved Tf you con- 
sider Brahma to he the material cause 
of the universe, it means that everything 
is Brahma which involves the fallacy 
already alluded to above. If you consider 
M&y&to be sentieut, the same fallacy ap- 
plies to it as well. If you consider Maya 
to be inseparate from God, thei: it is su- 
fficent to speak only of Brahma and not 
of another superfluous entity. 

33. — Q. I consider Ma) a to be indescribable. 

A.-— The argument about the indescribability 
of existence has already been repudiated. 
The prefix Nis in the term "Anirvach- 
niya" (indescribable) means negation and 
the remaining portion of it according to 
the Kalapik Vy&karana (Grammar) means 
either existence or non-existence. If you 
deny existence, non-existence is proved 
and if you deny non-existence, existence 
is proved. There is nothing else than 
existence and non-existence. The term 
"Anirvaehniya" or "Indescribable" seems 
to have been invented only as a trade 



( 51 } 

trick. By that word, only the dualistic 
theory is proved, not the monistic one. 

Q. — The Vedic texts such as "God alone is 
the creator of all" prove only the monistic 
theory. 

A. — This statement of yours is also untrue. 
If the whole mankind is of one essence 
and form, then all phenomena such as one 
being happy and another miserable &c.&c. 9 
will become eventually unreal. If this is 
your position, then the statement that "the 
world having been found to be useless, 
one should avoid and evade it" would be 
as meaningless as speaking of the fra- 
grance of sky flowers. If there is only 
one essence without a second, there is 
no such thing as rebirth of souls in 
this world which is to be avoided as some 
thing useless and abominable. 



D 



35. Q. — In reality there is nothing else than 
Brahma and the universe which has now 
been declared useless and which is always 
visible to all the beings is just like the 
appearance of the limbs &c, of a woman 



( 52 ) 

in a picture. It is to be seen whether 
the dimensions of the limbs of the woman 
in the picture are illusionary or produc- 
tive of illusion. 

A. — What you say is all wrong. There 
is in fact no proof supporting your state- 
ment. If in order to prove only one 
Brahma without anything else, you resort 
to some other distinct evidence you only 
prove Dualism, becausegWithout any proof 
no one's position is proved. If you 
consider a thing proved without any proof, 
then all religionists can prove their self- 
believed creeds. A mirage or illusion 
should be considered separate from the 
Advaitism, which you consider to have 
been proved. 

The theory of Advaitism which you 
have established will thus be disproved. 
If illusion is only a form of Advaitism it 
is necessarily a form of the Brahma. If 
the mirage or illusion is a form of the 
Brahma, the knowledge about elements 
can never be proved. If you consider 



( 53 ) 

illusion to be separate from Brahma you 
come to believe in Dualism and the 
monistic theory is damaged. If you con- 
sider the belief in the distinction between 
a pillar and a pot to be illusion, then it 
means that the pot &c. has a real ex- 
istence somewhere, so long as the reality 
is not seen one cannot form the idea of 
illusion or unreality. He who has not 
seen a live serpent can never have the 
illusion of a serpent in a rope. 

This too repudiates the monistic reality. 
The monistic theory is certainly to be 
preached to others and not to one's own- 
self as the preacher is himself without 
any illusion or perverted knowledge. If 
the preacher is himself affected with illu- 
sion he cannot prove the monistic theory 
to others. 

36. Q —Since the soul is affected with illusion or 
perverted knowledge it is necessary to 
preach the monistic theory. 

A. — When the illusion of the soul is gone, 



( 54 ) 

it will certainly change its condition and 
when there is such a change, Dualism 
comes in of itself. When a man preaches 
Advaitism to another man it is taken for 
granted that another man exists. To be 
preaching monism to another man and at 
the same time believing in its truths is 
just like saying that one's father has been 
a celibate from bis birth. Certainly such 
a man is devoid of all sense. Believing 
in the existence of oneself and of another 
is nothing else than Dualism. To believe 
in monism is therefore destitute of all rea- 
soning. 

37. Q — The existence of one Supreme soul is 
enough to show the baselessness of all 
knowledge relating to differences. 

Kotb:— If the serpent has not been seen before, how can it be seen in 
a rope. It is owing to the previous observation or non-observa- 
tion that illusion or non-illusion occurs, 

A. — This argument of yours is also wrong 
in asmuch as the existence of one Supreme 
soul has not been proved. 

If there is such an existence is it self- 
evident or proved by the help of some 



( 55 ) 

other evidence ? It is not self-evident 
for if it were so, none could have any con- 
troversy about it. If it is proved by 
means of other evidence, is that evidence 
empirical or scriptural ? If this evidence 
is empirical, what is the argument ? 
Please explain. 

38. Q — The argument is this that the matter 
which is under discussion relates to the 
interpenetration of the Brahma in the 
outward phenomena, because whatever 
appearances there are, have for their back- 
ground some underlying principle. 

In other words all phenomena have 
nomena behind them, just as the func- 
tions of the body which are outwardly 
apparent have the soul for their under- 
lying principle. Since all sentient and 
insentient phenomena are under consi- 
deration their outward appearance cannot 
be accounted for without there being some 
underlying principle behind them. The 
instances of a pot, a piece of cloth, &c. 
&c. are illustrative of this position. 



( 56 ) 

A.— This argument of yours is not correct 
because the existence of the subject matter 
to be proved, the reasoning proving it and 
the example illustrating it, is only by 
way of proof. 

39. Q — There are two kinds of (1J one God— the 
material cause of the universe and (2) 
matter which is eternal. The matter con- 
sists of the atoms of Earth, Water, Fire, 
and Air, and of Space, Direction, Soul, 
mind and time. These nine substances 
are eteanal and beginningless — not made 
by any one. With the aid of these God 
creates the world. 

The manner in which God is consider- 
ed the Creator of the world by religionists 
is this. "He is one-the creator of the world. 
He is omnipresenr, eternal and self-de- 
pendent. He is the Lord of this visible 
world and its multitudes of beings." 

Those who believe in the creation of 
the world by God hold that the earth, 
mountains, trees &c. in asmuch as they 
are effects, are the work of an intelligent 



( 57 ) 

Being. The world is a product just like 
a pot. It is therefore the production of 
an intelligent Being who is none else than 
God. If you say that this argument is 
untenable because the earth, mountains, 
trees &c. are produced by the combination 
of their innate causes and are therefore 
effects, and have bodies ; this is not right. 
Nor can it be said that this argument is 
manysided and contradictory as it is very 
remote from the position of the oppo- 
nents. Nor can it be urged that this argu- 
ment is beyond the basis of Time as the 
direct evidence is not barred by the scrip- 
ture-the subject and its attributes being 
different. Nor can it be said that this 
argument is not cognate as what is to be 
proved is not established by the absence 
of the contrary proposition. Nor can it 
be said that God is not the creator of the 
world because of His having no body and 
being just as a liberated souL There is 
a conflict between the first and second 
propositions which does not allow the 
statement that God is the creator of the 



( 58 ) 

world, to be established. By denying a 
body to God, He has not been proved the 
creator of the world. We believe in God 
having a body and therefore our proposi- 
tion is correct. God is only one. If 
there were many Gods, there would be a 
divergence of views among them in the 
accomplishment of a work (taken up by 
all simultaneously). As there is none else 
to check them their differences will con- 
tinue and the accomplishment of the work 
be interfered with. 

The case would be that one God is 
creating a man with four legs, another 
with six legs, the third, with two legs 
and the fourth, with eight legs. In this 
manner all other things will be made 
variously. There would in such a case 
be general confusion and disorder in the 
world. 

But no such disorder is seen ; hence 
the creator is only one God. God is also 
omnipresent and omniscient. If God 
were not omnipresent, the things which 



( 59 ) 

would be created simultaneously in all 
the three worlds, would never be created 
at the same time because only where pot- 
ters are present, pots will be made and 
not where they are not present. God. 
is omniscient. If He were not so, He 
could not be able to know the material 
causes of all the products. If He did not 
know the material causes of the products 
He would not create a variety among the 
objects. God is self-dependent not rely- 
ing upon any one else. He dispenses 
fruits of happiness or sorrow by His own 
will. "It is by the will of God that the 
worldly beings go to heaven or hell. 

Without Him they are unable to reward 
or punish themselves for their virtuous 
or wicked deeds." 

If God is dependent upon some one 
else, then He will not be regarded as the 
chief author of the world. There will 
also come in the fallacy o£ argument in a 
circle if one God is dependent upon an- 
other and another upon the third and so 
on and so forth. 



( 60 ) 

God is therefore self-dependent— not 
under the control of some one else. God 
is eternal. If He were non-eternal, some 
one else is required to create Him. There 
is no other such Being ; therefore God is 
eternal. It will thus be observed that 
God is the creator of the world. 

A. — Your statement that the earth, moun- 
tains, trees, &c. are the work of an intellU 
gent Being, is untenable, for your proposi- 
tion does not recognise the quality of 
"pervasion." The inference is not valid 
till supported by the evidence of " perva 
sion." What I say is recognised by all 
learned men. Now I ask you whether 
the God that creates has a body or no. 
If He has a body, is His body visible just 
like ours or invisible like the body of 
ghosts &c? If you consider that He has 
a body like ours, then it involves the fal- 
lacy of the infringement of direct evid- 
ence, as Grass, trees, rainbow, clouds &c. 
are seen being produced without the pre- 
sence of God. If you accept the other 
statement, then the body ofGod is invis* 



f 61 ) 

ble. I ask whether this body is invisible 
by the reason of its grandeour or by reason 
of our vitiated sight which is the result 
of our previous bad actions. For the state- 
ment that the body of God is invisible 
owing to its transcendent glory, there is 
no proof. Besides your statement has 
the fallacy of mutual dependence. When 
it is proved that His glory is transcendent, 
then only is proved the invisibility of His 
body and vice versa. 

If the body of God is that of a ghost, 
then the matter will remain as doubtful 
as it was. The question will be whether 
there is any God at all as His body is in- 
visible. Either it is not in existence just 
as the son of a barren woman or it is the 
gloom of our past action which obstructs 
our vision. Such doubts will never cease. 
If you say that God is without a body, 
then the illustration and the one whose 
illustration is given will be mutually in- 
consistent and the argument will be self- 
destructive, because the author of effects 
such as pots &c. is a potter with a visible 



( 62 ) 

body. If you call God without a body, 
He will be found incompetent to do any- 
thing. Just as the vacuum of the sky in 
without any maker, so God either with 
or without body cannot be proved as asso- 
ciated with the effects of the world. Be- 
sides your argument is not all comprehen- 
sive in asmuch as you admit that there 
is no intelligent author of such effects as 
lightning, clouds, rainbow &c. Your argu- 
ment vitiated as it is, does not prove that 
an intelligent God is the creator of the 
world. The statement that the whole 
world is the work of God is not tenable, 
for, there is no evidence to prove that 
God is the creator of the world, 

Q. — Evidence proving God to be the creator 
of the world is of the character of nuinfer- 
ence. One who dispenses fruits to beings 
according to their actions must be an 
intelligent judge. Tools such as an axe 
or a saw gradually cut a piece of wood 
into two under the supervision of an art- 
izan, so do the good or evil consequences 
of actions take effect under the direction 



( 63 ) 

of an intelligent judge. It can never be 
said that such tools as an axe and a sa* 
move themselves to cut up a piece of 
wood becanse they are insentient objects. 
If it is said that it is the nature of the 
axe and the saw to cut, then they should 
always be cutting and never cease. This 
is not the case. By this example it is 
proved that the different souls attain their 
fruits gradually under the direction of 
God-just as circular triangular and rect- 
angular villages and towns are the work of 
an intelligent town-planner. As are pots 
&c. exactly so are the earth, mountains, 
trees &c. the work of God. 

A. — The inferential proof by which you 
establish that God is the creator of the 
world is not sound as it suffers from the 
fallacy of taking for granted what is to 
be proved. It is just like what has already 
been refuted by me. The view held by 
the Jains as heretofore alluded to, is that 
the variety that we see in the world is 
due to the effects of actions. Karma or 
action alone is the cause of the conditions 



( 64 ) 

of happiness or sorrow of the various 
kinds of people inhabiting India, and all 
other countries, islands, and cold moun- 
tainous tracts. There is nothing else than 
Karma. Form experience too, Karma is 
found to be the prime cause. When a 
virtuous king reigns, there is neither 
famine nor any other distress and this 
happy state is justly considered as due tc 
the influence of his righteous actions. 
That which gradually gives reward or 
punishment to beings is Karma and Karma 
only. Actions depend up on men who 
being sentient beings are intelligent. It 
is therefore that actions being dependent 
upon rational beings gradually unfold 
their effects. If you say thac your aim is 
to prove only a super-intelligent God, 
and not ordinary intelligent beings, then 
your proposition is devoid of what is to 
be proved. The connection of God as a 
supervisor in regard to the action of an 
axe, or a saw is not established but the 
connection of potters and others in regard 
to making pots &c. is established. 
41. Q Even great men are led to their work 



( 65 ) 

by the promptings of God. My proof does 
not suffer from the fallacy of taking for 
granted what is to be proved. 

A. — If it is so, then God will require another 
God to prompt Him to action, and that 
God, a third God to move him on and so 
on and so forth. Such a proposition in- 
volves the fallacy of reasoning in a circle. 

42. Q. — Artisans &c. are ignorant ; therefore 
they require the prompting of God, but 
God being omniscient, does not require 
such a stimulus. My reasoning has, there- 
fore, no fallacy. 

A. — This statement is also wrong as it is 
mutually contradictory. You have first 
to prove that God has a clear knowledge 
of all things, then you can prove that God 
acts without any prompting from any 
other Being. When it is proved that God 
acts of Himself without a stimulus from 
some one else, then only it can be proved 
that God has a clear knowledge of all 
things. Until one of these propositions is 
proved, the other cannot be established. Q 



( 66 ) 

believer in God I I ask you how it is that 
God being himself omniscient and passion* 
less, inclines men towards evil pursuits. 
Those who are wise, are impartial. Men 
ought, therefore, to be led towards good 
actions, not evil actions, but it is seen that 
God leads men even towardse vil actions. 
This does not prove that He is omniscient 
and passionless. 

43. Q. — Ishwara leads all men to do good actions; 
therefore He is omniscient and beyond 
all passions. Those who do evil actions 
are punished by Him in this way that He 
inclines them to do undesireable things 
which lead them to hell. This is because 
such men may be in fear of similar trou- 
bles and be deterred from committing 
sin again, as He dispenses suitable fruits 
to men. He is wise, passionless and with* 
out any blemish. 

A. — This statement is also thoughtlessly 
made because it is God and none else who 
originally inclines people to do evil. 
The soul itself cannot do anything be- 



( 07 ) 

cause it is unintelligent and cannot do 
good or evil of its own accord. 

To first drive people to do evil and 
then to throw them into the hell, thus 
punishing them and then taking them back 
to right paths, appears to be the only 
power of God. 

44 # Q. — God never drives people to do evil ; it 
is they themselves, who lean towards 
them. God dispenses fruits to men ac- 
cording as theyper form actions. Take, 
for instance, the example of a king who 
penalises theft and never directs a thief 
to commit theft. If a thief commits 
theft, he must be punished by the king. 
Similarly God does not prompt people to 
do evil but certainly punishes those who 
do evil. 

A. — This argument too, is fallacious, because 
worldly kings however powerful, are never 
able to stop commission of theft alto- 
gether. Let such kings strive with all 
their heart, word and action to prohibit 



( 68 ) 

the commission of theft and similar evil 
deeds, but they will never succeed in keep- 
ing all men away from committing such 
acts. On the other hand, God is, accord- 
ing to you, omnipotent ; if so, why does 
He not keep all men away from doing 
evil. When God is unable to keep men 
away from doing evil, it is clear that God 
inclines them to do evil and then punshi- 
es them afterwards. This position is 
open to the same criticism of God as here- 
tofore pointed out. If you say that God 
is unable to keep men away from doing 
evil, then you cannot boast loudly that 
God does everything and that He is omni- 
potent. If men perform good or bad ac- 
tions themselves, then they can enjoy 
their fruits themselves, and it is needless 
to believe that God is the creator. 

45. Q,— It is the men themselves who do right 
and wrong actions, but it is God who re- 
wards or punishes them for them. 

Men are not in a position to enjoy the 
fruits of their actions themselves just as 



( 69 ) 

thieves who commit thefts themselves are 
not able to punish themselves for their 
nefarious deeds. It is another man who 
sends them to a prison. 

A. — This statement is also fallacious. When 
men are competent to do right or wrong 
actions, why are they not competent to 
enjoy their fruits themselves ? Accord- 
ing as a man does right or wrong, he be- 
comes the cause of enjoying its fruits 
himself. A theif commits theft. The 
king punishes him or the thief is affected 
by such unclean diseases as leprosy, ul- 
ceration &c. It is not unoften that such 
a man dies being burnt b^ fire, or being 
drowned in water or being cut up by a 
sword or killed by a cannon ball or bullet 
or being destroyed by the fall of a build- 
ing or a rock or is turned a starving 
wretch. 

In various such ways, he undergoes the 
punishment for his evil deeds. In such 
a case, there is no need of the intervention 
of God. It is only the cause that fructi- 



( 70 ) 

fies in these evil effects and the cause is 
the man himself who performs the deed. 

Similarly there are various ways in which 
man undergoes punishment in hell or 
attains reward in heaven. If you ask 
what cause will lead to punishment in a 
case of fornication, I cannot answer, for my 
knowledge is limited, and cannot definite- 
ly tell the causes that will work in draw- 
ing the necessary punishment, but I can 
say so much that there are certainly causes 
which bring reward or punishment for 
good or evil actions. What fruit will a 
man attain and how and when and where, 
only the blessed Arhat can say. Without 
a cause, none can attain the consequences 
of his acts. It is, therefore, superfluous to 
bring in God for dispensation of these 
fruits. Can a sensible man say that a man 
is fit enough to cook his food but unfit to 
eat it. You bring in another indictment 
against God by considering him as the dis- 
penser of fruits. Suppose a man is slain 
by a sword by another man. How was it 
that the slain man got his suffering and 
pain. Who was it that led to this suffer- 



( 71 ) 

ing. If you say that it was God who 
drove the slayer to slay the man, then 
why is the slayer liable to be hanged? 

Is this the law of God ? He (God) 
first prompted the slayer to slay a man 
and then punished him with gallows. 
Your statement renders God extremely 
unjust. If you say that the slayer slew 
the man himself without any prompting 
from God, then it is proved that man at- 
tains reward or punishment by reason o£ 
his own acts and that no intervention of 
God is required as only the puny-witted 
men imagine. believer in God, I 
ask you anotker question. If it is God 
who, for good deeds, gives one the reward 
of enjoyment of sexual pleasures in the 
company of youth-inebriated celestial 
nymphs, does He not at the same time 
punish others for misdeeds by throwing' 
them into the fire of hell and subjecting 
them to various excruciating mortifica- 
tions ? 

46. Q.— God punishes a man for the misdeeds he 



( 72 ) 

has committed, for no misdeed should 
remain unpunished. 

A. — Your statement shows that God inflicts 
suffering upon men unnecesarily. Accord- 
ing to you, man cannot enjoy the fruits of 
their actions without the intervention of 
God. If He were not to punish men, they 
would never suffer in consequences of their 
deeds and thus will never be reborn or com- 
mit any further sins. What is it that lead& 
God to roll these men again into the hell, 
when they are not performing any sinful 
actions ? An impartial and compassionate 
Being, never inflicts unnecessary suffering 
upon any man. 

47. Q. — It is for his own entertainment or a- 
musement that God sends one to heaven, 
and another to hell, makes one a crawling 
snail and another a man. When these 
beings skip and jump for merriment or 
weep or beat their breasts for sorrow, God 
derives enjoyment from the spectacle of 
his own creation. It is for this purpose 
that the world is created. 



( 73 ) 

A. — 1£ this is the case, God is not certainly 
wise. What is a mere amusement to him,, 
involves infinite suffering to the created 
beings. It is unwise to call God merci- 
ful. One who is compassionate and all- 
knowing, never enjoys the fun consequent 
upon the sufferings of others. God has 
been said to be without passions, but now 
you say that he creates the world for his 
own enjoyment and amusement. Is a- 
musement consistent with dispassion ? If 
God is dispassionate, it is impossible that 
he feels pleasure in such a show. 

48. Q. — Our God is possessed of passion and 
hatred ; hence He can take pleasure in an 
amusement. 
A. — If God has passion and hatred, He i& 
passionate like other beings ; He is not 
beyond passions as alleged, neither is He 
omniscient. He is just like ourselves. 
How can He be the creator of the uni- 
verse. 

19. Q. — We believe in Him to be the creator of 
the universe, though possessed of passion 
and hatred. 



( 74 ) 

A.— There is no proof supporting your state- 
ment that God is omniscient, notwithstan- 
ding His being possessed of passion and 
hatred. 

50. Q. — There is no incompatability in being 
omniscient and being possessed of passion 
and hatred. Fire burns but the ether does 
not. The tendency to burn, that exists 
in fire, is not found in the ether. Similar- 
ly God is, by His disposition, both passion- 
ate and omniscient. 

A. — What you say is not held by the fol- 
lower of any creed. None would say that 
an ass which stands before him, is the 
creator of the world. If one asks why the 
ass is the creator of the world, your an- 
swer would be that it is so by its very 
nature. After creating the world, though 
omniscient and passionate, he turns into 
an ass. Similarly people will consider a 
buffalo &c. as the creator of the world. 
God is, therefore, only what one sets up 
in his imagination. This is verily a 
blasphemy. If God is omniscient and 



( 75 ) 

beyond passions, why should He create 
the world for His amusement ? 

Believer in God, if, according to you, 
everything has been created by God, then 
the scriptures of all faiths have been 
created by Him and these scriptures are 
contradictory to one another. Most of 
them are true and others untrue. God 
would, therefore, be considered as the prea- 
cher of both right and wrong. He is, 
therefore, Himself setting one against the 
other in religion Thousands-nay hundr- 
eds of thousands people destroy them- 
selves by these religious dissensions. Does 
it not seem that God by creating the scrip- 
tures, has brought on a catastrophe on the 
world? The author of such false scriptures 
should be designated an im poster, not God. 
If you say that God has created only the 
true scriptures, not false ones which have 
been put together by men themselves, 
then it does not appear that God has creat- 
ed the world. It is the creatures who have 

created the world, and not God, because 
it has not been proved that God is the 
creator of all things in the world. 



( 76 ) 

51. Q. — As to your statement that all objects 
having bodies are the work of an intelli- 
gent Being, I give an example and it is 
that an old ruined well reminds of a 
mason, though not present there, as in the 
case of a newly built well. 

A. — Your positionis not correct, a cloud, a 
serpent's hole etc. are objects having 
bodies but their maker is not any intelli- 
gent Being. If you say that a cloud, the 
rainbow, a serpent's hole &c. are not 
considered to be the work of an all-intelli- 
gent. Being, then similarly the earth and 
mountains do not require an intelligent 
Being to produce them. 

God is never proved to be the creator of 
the world on the strength of the argu- 
ments hitherto advanced. I ask those 
who believe God to be the creator of the 
world to thoroughly answer all my argu- 
ments and until they do so, they should 
cease believing in the God being the 
creator of the world. If any believers 
in God answer all these arguments satis- 



( 77 ) 

factorily, I shall feel inclined to that belief, 
otherwise my position holds good. 

32. Q.— God is not proved to be the creator of 
the world. I now ask you whether it 
is not true that there is only one God. 

A. — There is no evidence to show that there 
is only one God. Until such evidence is 
produced, the oneness of God cannot be 
established. 

53, Q. — The argument showing the singularity 
of God is this. When a number of men 
undertake a work, it does not succeed 
owing to the difference of views of these 
men. If there were many Gods, there 
would be a great difference of opinions 
among them regarding the work of crea- 
tion, which would produce confusion. 
Does it not therefore show that God is 
onh 7 One ? 

A. — Your reasoning does not establish the 
oneness of God, because God has not been 
proved to be the creator of any thing. Is 
it not strange that while a multitude o£ 



( 78 ) 

bees become of one mind in the construe* 
tion of their honeycomb, Gods, who are 
lofty souls, immutable, immaterial, and of 
the forms of light, do not agree with each 
other. Do you consider Gods to be inferior 
even to insects in intelligence, knowledge 
and goodness as they cannot agree ? 

54. Q. — The construction of the honeycomb, 
which a swatm of bees seem to build, m 
really due to the inner working of God, 

A. — If it is so, then all such acts as making! 
a pot, committing theft or fornication &c.l 
will appear to have really been prompted! 
by God, and man will be stripped of theirl 
responsibility. 

Who will in such circumstances suffer 
the consequences of their deeds ? Nor 
will there remain any necessity of send-^ 
in«; men to heaven or hell. 



o 



55. Q. — It is evident that a potter, a thief or foi^ 
the matter of that any other man has 
perfect liberty of action. 



( 79 ) 

A. — Are bees alone to be debarred from hav- 
ing liberty of action ?. When such a diffi- 
culty comes in the way in the belief of 
only one God, one fails to understand how 
enormously would these difficulties be 
multiplied if there are many Gods engaged 
in creating the world with conflicting 
views, as there would be no foreman among 
them. One God, on seeing another God,, 
will be jealous of his equal power and 
many other similar difficulties will spring 
up. Your argument based on the above 
assumption regarding the oneness of God r 
is really rotten and unsound. When you 
call God to ba omniscient, it does not 
behove you to say that such beings will 
have a divergence of opinion and that they 
will not be of one mind. 

When a God is assumed to be devoid 
of passions, jealousy, pride &c, how will 
he be affected by jealousy and pride on 
meeting another equally powerful God ? 
If such Gods were to quarrel among them- 
selves led by jealousy and pride, they 
would cease to be Gods. When it is im* 



( 80 ) 

possible to prove God to be the creator 
of the world, how is it possible to prove 
mutual bickerings among Gods in the 
matter? It is, therefore, free from any logi- 
cal flaw to believe in a number of Gods* 
The assumption that God is omnipresent, 
is also untenable. If God is omnipresent, 
is he so by means of his material form or 
the form of knowledge ? 

If God pervades all by his material form, 
then the whole universe will be over* 
whelmed with the immensity of his body; 
no room will be left for other substances 
to stand. It is, therefore, impossible to 
think that God pervades the universe by 
his material form. 

56, Q. — Has God any material body as shown by 

your argument? 

A. — There are no religionists in the world, 
who believe that God has a material body e 

57. Q.— What religions do believe in a personal 

God? 

A. — We, the Jains, believe that one who has 






( 81 ) 

attained salvation while living with his ma- 
terial body is a God. It is written in the 
Tauret that God ate bread at the house of: 
Abraham and that he had a wrestling with 
Jacob. It shows that God has a body* 
Anandgirl — the disciple of Shankar writes 
hi the beginning of the second chapter of 
Shankar-digvijaya that He is all-knowing. 
Anand-giri writes that when N^rad found 
that there had sprung up a variety of 
imaginary creeds and that the ancient reli- 
gion had disappeared he weirt to Brahma 
and addressed him thus:— "Sire, Thy 
ancient religion has disappeared and m 
its place many a fanciful creed has sprung 
.up. Something must be done to remove 
,this state of affairs/" On hearing this 
Brahma pondered over the matter a good 
4eal and then accompanied by his sons,, 
friends and devotees left his country and 
arrived at the abode of Shiva. As they ap- 
proached they fceheld Shiva as a radiance of 
millions of suns -concentrated in one plaoe 
but perceptible as the coolness of millions 
of moons. They saw he had five face^ 
the moon was his crown appearing as 



( 82 ) 

lisfhtning above the tuft of hair. Far rati 
was sitting on his left side. Such tt«* 
Mahadeo the Lord of all. Brahuia mndt 
an obeisance to him and said, Mahadeo, 
thou art omniscient, the Lord of all the 
world 3 the witness of all, the pervader of 
all, the first cause of all. This quotation 
shows that God has a body. If God had n<fc 
bod y, how could there be five faces. This* 
does not show that God is without body. 
If God has a body and is omnipresent, 
then his body alone will cover the whole 
world and another world will be required 
to contain all other objects, If you say 
that God pervades the universe by bis 
spirit, that has yet to be proved. We too 
believe our Bhagv&n to be omnipresent 
by reason of his knowledge. But your 
position should not be incompatible with 
the writings of your Vedas, In the 
Vedas, God is said to be omnipresent 
by his body. u His eyes all over 
the universe, His faces everywhere, His 
arms are outstreched all over the world, 
He is the beginning* of the whole world/' 
This quotation from the Vedas shows that 



( 33 ) 

God pervades the universe in his material 
body. It being so, the fallacy previously 
pointed out, applies to this statement. 
God is not therefore omnipresent. Nor 
is your statement that God is omniscient, 
established. Wby has he created us who 
do not believe that He is the creator of the 
world and act in opposition to Him? If 
you say that we obtain fruits according 
to the deeds performed by us in previous 
lives, then the need of God as a mediator 
is altogether gone. When God cannot 
give us anything without our previously 
performed actions, then God has no in - 

dependance. We -shall reap as we sow. 
If you say that God doe-s what he likes 

then no one knows what He will do. 
Perhaps he might send the virtuous to 
hell and the wicked to heaven. If you 
say that God is just and dispenses fruits 
to men according to their deeds then the 
same fallacy as heretofore pointed out 
comes in. The statement that God is 
everlasting is equally untenable for one 
that is everlasting, remains unchanged in 
all times. If He is everlasting then it 



( 84 ) 

may be asked whether nature creates the 
world or no. 

If you say that ic is the nature of God 
to create the world, then it will prov^ 
that God will keep on perpetually creat- 
ing the world i. e. He will never cease 
creating as He is endowed with the nature 
that always creates. If you say that it 
is not His nature to create the world, then 
God will never be in a position to create 
it. If God has an eternal nature to create, 
then there would be no Pralaya or dis- 
solution of the universe because it is not 
God's nature to destroy. If you say that 
God's nature is twofold creative as well 
as destructive, then no world will ever be 
created or destroyed for two such powerp 
in opposition to each other will never 
abide simultaneously. If they do, the 
world would neither be created nor des? 
troyed, for when the creative power is 
creating the destructive power will be 
working havoc or vice versa. 

This only leads one to consider that 
what we believe is true u e. the world has 



( 85 ) 

neither been created by any one iior will 
it ever be destroyed that is eternal, as 
we hold. If you ask what fallacy there 
is in the statement that God creates and 
destroys the world when he is moved by 
creative or destructive desires then the 
powers of the God will be considered as 
iion-eternaL If it is so, God is also non- 
eternal because God is not separated from 
his powers. If you maintain that His 

powers are separate from Him, then too 
the world will never be created or des- 
troyed by reason of these powers being 
eternal and God will be proved as having 
done nothing, for, when God is separate 
from His powers, He is consequently 
unable to do anything. How will He 
be able to create the world? and who will 

be the material cause of the powers? This 
will only prove the non-existence of God, 

for, what is God stripped of His powers. 

He will be as imaginary as a flower in the 

clouds. Who will in such a case be the 

creator of the world? 

38. Q. — If an omniscient and passionless God 



{ 86 ) 

is not the creator of the world, how hae 
this world sprung up of itself. It is 
evident nothing is made without a maker 

just as a clock &c. 

A.— 0, enquirer; You do not seem to fully 
understand my argument and it is there- 
fore you call God the creator of the world. 
We also hold that the finished articles 
that we see were made by some one, for 
example pot, cloth, clock, house, stall, 
chain &c, but such things as Sky, Time, 
Atoms, Soul &c. have not been made 
by any one. All learned man agree 
in the view that all things which have 
the forms of effects, must have material 
causes. Without a material cause no such 
effect can be produced. Only a fool can 
say against this view. But soul, time, 
atoms, and sky have no material causes 
and are therefore beginningless and none 
has made them. The statement that all 
things have been made by God is therefore 
untenable. 

As regardes the earth, water, fire, aif 
plants, moving creatures, and such por» 



< 87 ) 

tions of the earth as heaven, hell, and 
sun, moon, planets, stars, constellations 
&c, these are made by the combination 
of matter and spirit. The earth &c. are 
eternal by reason of their continuity and 
non-eternal by their apparent forms. 

The matter and spirit embodying 
them are of infinite potentialities. These 
eternal forces manifest themselves when 
combined with their respective causes 
such as time &e. and ali the creation in 
the world that has been, is and will be, 
is due to the following five material, 
causes — time, nature, continuity, action 
and energy. Except these five causes, 
no other creator or director of the world 
as God is proved. The line of argument 
refuting such an assumption has already 
been explained. A single seed is charged 
with infinite potentialities. A variety of 
colours, leaves, roots, fruits, bark, branches, 
flowers, seeds &c. &c. abide in the seed 
in potential forms. When the seed is 
burned to ashes, its potential forces reside 
In its atoms bat none of these force* 



( 88 ) 

comes into manifestation without its 
cause or concomitant. If no such cha- 
racteristic forces reside m the seed, why 
is it that a seed of wheat does not produce 
mangoes, thorns, men, animals, birds &e. 
All things have therefore their peculiar 
infinite forces. As they combine with 
their peculiar causes, they come into mani- 
festation. A seed contains in miniature 
all the features of a tree but until it 
combines with its external concomitants,, 
it does not blossom. These external con- 
comitants are (1) rain (2) earth and 
water. Even if rain, earth &c. combine 
they cannot produce a blossom unless the 
(seed is endowed with the potentiality to 
blossom. Apiece of stone, if sown will 
not give a blossom though all the three 
external causes combine. Even granting 
that all the four causes above mentioned 
exist, no blossom will come forth regularly 
unless the feature of continuity is com- 
bined with the forces of the seed. The 
previous action has also a great deal te 
do, for if there were no previous action 
to reckon with, the present form in wkick 



( 89 ) 

things are produced would not be deter- 
mined. If there were no man to sow a 
seed or the seed itself by its gravity were* 
not to fall on the ground, it would never 
put forth a blossom. Therefore there are 
five causes in the growth of a seed and 
these are (1) Time, such as rainy season 
(2) Nature* 3) Continuity s 4) Previous 
action and (5) Effort. 

Except these five causes, no other 
cause, such as God, is proved in regard to 
the growth of a seed. Similar is the 
case in regard to the birth of a child. 
(1) the pregnancy would take effect 
in its proper time (2) the womb must 
have the power to bold an ambryo (3) the 
continuity of the pregnancy without any 
disturbance, (4) the previous action 
which would induce birth as a man 
and (5) the effort of parents in the direc- 
tion of producing a child. All the things 
that are seen in this world are produced 
by the agency of these five causes. Tin 
continuity of the existence of the eartt 
is insured though it* visible phenomena 



( 90 ) 

continually change. Multitudes of beings 
are always born, and die. The aggregate 
of the bodies of these beings is the earth. 
The view that the earth being in the 
form of an effect is bound to be entirely 
dissolved some day just as a pot, is not 
correct, because the earth has not exactly 
the same effect as a pot. A pot never 
involves forces of growth but the earth 
involves such forces, countless bodies are 
daily produced and destroyed. By the 
combination and destruction of these 
countless bodies, the earth remains the 
same. Look at a river which keeps its 
continuity of flow by the efflux and in- 
flux of waters. A pot is not of this 
nature. The earth is therefore bound to 
eternally exist and the phenomena of life 
seen on it will never disappear. It will 
exist everlastingly and the God is not 
its creator. There are many simple 
minded men who on seeing men, animals, 
earth, air, vegetables, the sun, and the 
moon, and the ingenious t arrangement 
of the bones of bodies of men and ani- 
mals, lids of eyesj semi -spheres of thi 



C n ) 

brain, the wonderful arrangement of 
arteries in the body, become puzzled and 
when they are unable to explain the 
phenomena they come to believe that 
none but God can create these things and 
therefore call God the creator of the uni- 
verse, but they do not know that by 
making this statement they bring abouc 
the destruction of God, 

0, simple minded man ! if you were 
acquainted with 148 distinctions of 8 
kinds of actions you would not have 
impaired the greatness of God by imput- 
ing to Him the creation of the world. 
Whatever acts have been attributed to 
God by the imagination of man are proved 
to be the result of actions themselves. 
These actions are described in brief as 
below ; — 

What action is according to the belief 
of the Jains, is thus explained. Just as % 
man having rubbed his body with oil 
goes about in the town and fine atoms 
of dust get stuck to his body by the con* 
tact of oil rubbed thereon, exactly so tbi 



( 92 ) 

inner impressions of such moral flaws as 
injury to living beings, falsehood, theft, 
sexual intercourse, extortion, anger, pride, 
1 Husidn i covetousness* passion, hatred, 
quarrel* calumny, jealousy^ scandal, like 
or dislike, sentiments, false utterances, 
sentimental grievance^ which may all be 
considered of the nature of oil* get mixed 
up with the atoms of matter aiid consti- 
tute what is called the subtle body of 
desire. This body accompanies the soul 
indispensably from all eternity. It con- 
tains countless potentialities of merit and 
demerit. This body according to the 

belief of Jains, is called Karma ; according 
to the belief of the follower of Sankhya^ 
3hature| according to the Yedantis, illusion; 
and according to the Naiyayik and Vais- 
heshik, something invisible. Some divide 
these into past, present and future actions* 
Budhists call them desires or Vasnas. 
Thoughtless people call these actions as 
the work of God or nature, but no fol- 
lower of any religion knows accurately 
the nature of these actions because ir 
these religions there has been no all 



( 93 ) 

knowing sage who could accurately de& 
cribe them. People falling into the net 
of delusion or ignorance set up by the 
imagination of yarious writer*, blindly 
Wlow innumerable paths ot religiocu 
The eight kinds of actions are j— * 

(1) Actions that obscure knowledge; 
(2) Actions that obscure cognition, (3) 
Actions that create feelings (of pain or 
pleasure,) (4) Actions that bring on 
delusion, (5) Actions that determine 
period of life (Age), (6) Actions that 
determine the individuality (Name,) (7) 
Actions that determine the surroundings 
(Clan,) (8) Actions that interfere with the 
performance or enjoyment of good things. 

The first is of five kinds, the 
second of nine, the third of two, the 
fourth of 28, the fifth of 4, the sixth of 
93, the seventh of 2, and the eigth of 
5 kinds i. e. there are altogether 148 
kinds which are not separately described 
here for fear of space. 



( 94 ) 

My books entitled " The Esaimat 

Samiksha" (Examination of Christian 

faith) and the Jain Prashnott&ravali 

(Questions and answers on Jainism) m&y 

be referred to by those desirous of further 

particulars regarding the characteristic* 

of these 148 tendencies. For detailed 

information regarding the kinds and 

diversions of actions, Karma-gran tha^ 

Pancha Sangraha, Karmaprakriti Sfaataka 
and other works may be consulted. The 

wonderful mechanism of bodies is made 
by the operation of these 148 tendencies 
of actions. As the effects of food impart 
juice to the bones, muscles, eyelids, parts 
of brain, the general strength of th& 
body is developed; God takes no part in 
this operation, but Time, nature, lavr 
of continuity, action and energy are bring- 
ing about the wonderful creation of the 
world. If believers in God mean by God 
the combination of these five essentials, 
then there is no objection on our part. 
Except these causes, there is no creator. 
The objection that these divisions and 



( 95 ) 

kinds of actions are only the figments o! 
imagination of the Jains is absurd because 
the divisions are accepted by the Jains 
in view of their peculiar effects and can 
be established by argument and they 
have been seen directly by the eye of 
pure knowledge of the all-knowing and 
passionless sage (Tirthankar). The mar- 
vellous creation of the world cannot be 
proved by means of other than the&e 
causes. Sensible men should therefore 
accept the faith propounded by the 
Arhats, A passionless, all-knowing God 
can never be proved as the creator of the 
world as has already been shown. One 
who desires to know in detail the argu- 
ments refuting the view that God is the 
creator of the world may consult the 
following books : — 

1. Sammati-tarka ( SWT& <F& ) 

2. Dwadash&s&r Nayachakra ( jgj%« 

srerrc Swaraj ) 

3. Syadv&d Ratn&kar ( WWi T&lt- 

4. Anek&nt Jayapataka ( SjSp£F3T 



( 96 } 
5. Sha&fcra Varfd Satnucluhai (5?T^ 

m&i ^r^^r ) 

$. Sy&dv&d Kalpalat& (^T3T? *&??* 

SP^TT ) 
7. SyidviLd Manjari ( ^?TI£P? 3T3T?) 
.8, Sy&dvad Ratit&kHr&vatankfctefT- 

m^ ^T^^T^fTf^T ) 
9. Sutra Kritano-i ( g^r fy?rf*T 

10. Nandi-S&tra r^ ^3f 

11. Shahdambhonidhi Gandb&sti- 
MaMbhi-hya (^J^hw^tfe^RgSr 

jL2. Pramau Satnuchchai ( #J?TW ^f- 
53?I ) 

13. Pnun&ri Pari.ksh$ ( ^ffPIT TT^T ) 

14. Pratneya Miinansd (sr^T rft^rf^TTj 

15. Apta Mimlns4 ( WTH sfh?fcTT ) 
W. Prumeya Kamal M.&rtanda ( STORf 

17. Pramejaghan Mar.tauda j(s^r^t? 

IS. N\ayavat4ra ( r^i^rcfpC ) 

19. Dharinasangrahni { q^^I^I ) 

20. Tattvartha ( &mn ) 

%l. Shaddarsana-Samuchchaya (^lf- 



( 97 ) 

Q. — How has God been described in ancient 

scriptures ? 
A, — The Jain Shastras hold that the position 

of Arhat and Siddha is that of God. 
How this position is attained, is stated 
as below. When a soul through a great 
number of births has been assiduously 
practising the path of virtue, rectitude 
and justice according to the teaching of 
Arhats, and practises the difficult path of 
twenty virtues in his last third birth 
aspiring* to be an Arhat, it becomes tit 
to attain the position of a Tirthankar. 
In course of time sueh a one is born in a 
celestial region from where he comes 
down and takes his birth in a happy, pros- 
perous, noble and good royal family. Jf 
in the former birth he has acquired by 
his meritorious acts a privilege to enjoy 
worldly pleasures then he has to enjoy 
the best of worldly pleasures and do- 
minion. If he has not acquired the 
said privilege, he can enjoy neither 
worldly pleasures nor power. Such 
beings as are to attain the position 
o£ Arh&'Sp are born with three kinds of 



( 98 ) 

knowledge i.e. 3 Mati, Shruia and Avadhi 
He knows by his own knowledge 
the time when he should adopt Renuncia- 
tion* If his parents are living he takea 
their permission to retire from the world., 
If they are not living he takes permission 
for his holy mission from his brothers or 
other members of the family. A year 

before his initiation countless celestial 
beings come to him and say " B hag van, 

show the path of virtue and rectitude/* 
A year after, he enters the path of initia- 
tion with great festivities after making 
bounteous gifts of gold Mohars 9 but he 
makes no one his teacher or preceptor as 
he is himself to be the preceptor of the 
three worlds, As he is full of knowledge 
he relinquishes all sins, and practises seve- 
rest austerities. He destroys all the four 
kinds of actions that impede souPs progress 
and becomes self-enlightened. He then 
preaches truths that lead beyond the net 
of the world and reveal virtue and recti* 
lade. Such a one is Tirthankar. The 
acts which help towards the attainment 
of birth as Tirthankar and the twenty 



( 99 ) 

virtues alluded to above and involved in 
the performance of these acts are as 
follows : — 

The acts of reverence and devotion 
to the seven holy beings and their 
faithful service. These seven are Arhat, 
Siddha, Pravachana-sangha, Guru or Pre- 
ceptor, Sthavir, Bahushruta, and Tapas- 
vi (ascetic). The act of constantly con- 
templating in one's mind the forms of 
the above seven. The act of zealous 
observance of the virtues of right see- 
ing and modesty. The faultless obser- 
vance of j the necessary a:^ts of self-control. 
The act of constantly observing the 
Mulaguna (five great vows) and Uttar- 
guna (purification of the body &c). The 
act of right thinking every hour, every 
minute and every second throughout 
life. The act of observing austerities 
or giving alms to holy persons. The act 
of observing ten kinds of vows of service. 
The act of promoting mental peace of the 
holy teachers and others. The act of 
acquiring fresh knowledge. The act of 



( ioo ) 

spreading with faith the knowledge of 
Truth. The act of revering the scriptures. 
Theact of constantly following the path that 
has been preached by Arhats and endea- 
vouring to one's ability to propagate the 
same. Some secure the ultimate attain- 
ment of Tinhankarhood by practising, out 
of these virtues, one, and some, two, others 
three and some, all the twenty. Particu- 
lars of these are given in such works as the 
Jnata Dharmakatha, Kalpasutra, Avash- 
yaka &c. A Tirthankar never desires any 
reward for his good acts ; his teaching is 
beneficial alike to a prince and a beggar, 
a Brahman and a Chandal and is calculat- 
ed to take one beyond the ocean of 
rebirth. The merits of a Tirthankar 
cannot adequately be described even by 
such high celestial beings as Indra &c. 
It is therefore impossible for a man 
of my little understanding to d< 
them full justice. Even then something 
is attempted. A Tirthankar is endowed 
with infinite qualities — a few of which are 
these: Infinite pure knowledge, infinite 



( ioi ) 

pure vision, infinite power of action, 
infinite fivefold possessions, forgiveness, 
uncovetousness, uprightness, prideless- 
ness, humility, truth, self-control, selfless- 
ness, celebacy, compassion, benevolence, 
absence of hatred and passions. Equality 
of disposition towards friend and foe, 
gold and stone, woman and straw, absti- 
nence from flesh -food and wine and 
other uneatable things, immovability. 

He is the ocean of compassion. He is 
powerful, valiant, sober, courageous, fear- 
less, devoid of evil-speaking, unegoistic, 

desirous to save even those who do him 
ill. This is the description of the form 
of the Jains' God with body. When the 

body is discarded, he attains the position 
of a Siddha who dwells in his own 

eternal and infinite bliss. The God of 

the Jains has nothing to do with the 

creation of the world, or the task of taking 

incarnations, or the task of punishing or 

rewarding people according tc their 

merits or demerits or sending them to 

heaven or hell or showing pride in his 



( 102 ) 

being the ruler of the world. This is in 
brief the description of God as believed 
in by the Jains. The Naiyayikas and 
Vaisheshikas consider Shiva to be the God 
who creates and destroys the world, re- 
wards and punishes men according to 
their good or evil actions and sends them 
to heaven or hell, pervades the whole 
universe, takes periodical incarnations in 
the world to destroy the wicked and pro- 
tect the good. The Buddhists believe in 
a God similar to that of the Jains but 
they believe in his incarnations in the 
world, the followers of the Vedas believe 
that whatever there is in the world is 
God. The followers of Nir-ishwar San- 
khya School and Jaimini philosophy do 
not believe in God at all. 

60 Q — What view of God can be held according 
to modern science ? 

A. — The modern science is not opposed to the 
Jain scriptures ; it is in harmony with 
them. The Arhats have ascribed infinite 
powers to matter. There was also a 



( 103 ) 

work on the subject by the name of 
Yoniprabhrita Sh&stra which related to 
the chemistry of things. What the 
existing ancient Jain scriptures say is in 
accordance with science. What has been, 
Is and will be in this world is the result 
of the combination of matter and spirit. 
The cosmic laws that are, have been 
existing from all eternity by the strength 
of material and spiritual forces. This is 
why the Jains do not hold God to be the 
creator of the world. That God is not 
the creator of the world has already been 
established by a series of reasoning. If 
the forces of matter are to be considered 

God, then the Jains have no objection to 
it. The Jain belief is not therefore 
opposed to the conclusion of modern 
science. If it is contended that all subs- 
tances, all the forces inherent in them 
and that all the laws of the world have 
been created by the power of God, it is 
repudiated by the argument that do 
effects come into being without their 
material causes— an argument recognised 



( 104 ) 

valid by all learned men. Matter and 
spirit are therefore to be accepted eternal. 
When this has been conceded, the forces 
inherent in them will have also to be reco*r- 

CD 

nised as eternal. These forces manifest 
and destroy themselves when they get the 
aid of their coneommittant causes such as 
Time, disposition, law, inter action, and 
.mutual combination. According to the 
modern science the view of God as held 
by other religionists is found invalid. 

61. Q.— In what respects do statements about 
God fourd in different religious book* 
agree and in what do they differ ? 

A. — Jains, Naiyayikas, Patanjalists, Bud- 
dhists, and the followers of the Veil as 
hold God to be omniscient. That God is 
without a body is a common belief. 
That God is one without any beginning 
is the belief of the followers of Nyaya and 
Vaisheshika doctrines and ol the Vedas. 
The Jains and the Buddhists hold God 
to be beginningless but not one. The 
followers of the Vedas and of the Nyaya 



( 105 ) 

and Vaisheshika doctrine believe God to 
be the creator of the universe bat this is 
not the view of the Jains and the Bud- 
dhists. All except the Jains believe 
that Gcd takes incarnations in the world, 
being born in the womb of a woman. 
Except the Jains and the Buddhists the 
followers of all other religions consider 
God to be omnipresent. The Jains too 
consider God to be omnipresent by reason 
of his faculty of knowledge and not 
owing to his body. God is considered to 
do justice and give reward or punishment 
to ail beings by all religionists except the 
Jains and the Buddhists. Similar is the 
view as regards God's power to do what 
he likes. In respect to the following 
attributes of God, all religions hold a 
common view, subject to differences now 
and then in the meanings of these words, 



n 



The attributes are : — 

Without age, without death, without 
birth, without measure, without impurity, 
without form, unthinkable, uncountable, 



( 106 ) 

Bnthm, Lord, infinite, immutable, Lord 
of the ascetics, full of knowledge, stain- 
less, unchangeable, undecaying Supreme 
Lord, Supreme goal, controller, bliss, 
self existence, incomprehensible, knower 
of present, past and future, master-Lord, 
Lord of the Universe, immovable, un- 
perishable, &c. &c. 

62. Q. — What are the views about the existence 
of God in modern times ? 

A. — The atheists hold that there are no such 
things as soul, God, merit or demerit, 
heaven or hell, salvation &c. except the 
five elements of earth, water, fire, air 
and space from which all other things 
viz., soul etc., naturally evolve and dis- 
solve, Many men believe that whatever 
happens in the world happens by the 
desire of God. It is God and God alone 
who creates, nourishes, and destroys. 
Many others believe that the world has 
been created by God who gives happiness 
of heaven or sufferings of hell to the 
created beings according to their good or 



; 3 



( 107 ) 

bad actions. The Vedantists hold that 
whatever there is in the universe is but 
Brahma who manifests himself in various 
ways. The belief of the Jains is that 
when a being after having done good 
actions in innumerable births attains the 
position of a Tirthankar or Arhat in 
any birth, he shows to all deserving 
beings the way to liberation, which leads 
to the promulgation and performance of 
virtuous deeds. When a Tirthankar or 
Arhat shuffles off this mortal coil and 
attains salvation, he becomes a Siddha 
(the perfect) who is full of the eternal 
bliss of knowledge, of an eternal life of 
unending joys. He never does anything 
pertaining to the mundane affairs. 
These are in brief the various beliefs of 

people. 

Q.-~ What is the nature of man ? 

A. — It is man's nature to desire that he is 
highly respected and esteemed by others, 
that he is superior to others in prosperity 
riches, family, beauty, health, and physi- 



( 108 ) 

cal strength, that he becomes famous in 
the world and that he may attain a 

higher position in future. By reason of 
tricks, anger, pride, greed, passion, 
jealousy, &c, man's nature is vitiated. 
It is by the practice of virtues that a 
man becomes possessed of forgiveness 
humility, serenity of mind, contentment, 
passion, hatred &c. 

64 Q. — What is the superiority of man ? 

A. — Man considers himself superior to all 
animal kingdom in wisdom. 

65 Q. — In what respect is man inferior to God ? 
A. — The liberated souls whether in body or 

without body possess pure knowledge, 
pure sight, infinite power, infinite happi- 
ness, immortality, birthlessness, immut- 
ability, purity, immovability, indestruct- 
ability, &c. ; such infinite powers are their 
characteristics. In the case of a man 
these powers remain clouded by the 
darkness of actions. This is the inferiority 
of man to God. 



( 109 ) 

66 Q. — What position does man occupy in the 
creation ? 
A. — Man is third in the order of these four 
classes of Beings i.e. 1. Narki, 2. Vegetable, 
mineral and animal kingdoms, (Tiryancha) 
3. Men and 4. Angels In respect to hap- 
piness man occupies the second position 
to Gods or Angels; in respect to acquisi- 
tion of knowledge, performance of 
virtuous deeds, attainment of liberation 
and attainment of the position of God 9 
man occupies the first position. He 
holds the same position in respect to do- 
ing evil. 

67 Q. — What powers has soul to become man ? 
Has he power to become immortal or 

God ? 

A. — Soul has the following powers to be? 
come man. 

1. The softening down of delusion and 

passion into a mild form. 

2. Good thoughts. 

3. Manifestation of passion momentarily 

only. 



( no ) 

4. Indiscrimination between right and wrong. 

5. Propensity towards charity, without much 
desire for name or fame. 

6. Excessive love of offering charity accord- 
ing to one's disposition, 

7. Forgiveness, humility, pridelessness, com- 

passion, purity, veracity. Desire for the 
reward of worship and other wordly 
desires. 

Although we have already mentioned 
these powers in connection with the 
faculties of actions, we have neverthless 
given a brief account of them here. 
Soul has also powers to become God. 
But these powers never manifest them- 
selves until it has been purged of its 
eighteen defects. 

The eighteen defects are these. 

1. Obstruction to unstinted distribution of 

charity. 

2. Obstruction to unstinted possessions. 

3. do. do. powers. 



( 111 ) 

A. Obtruction to unstinted new enjoyments 
such as flowers, garlands &c. 

5. Obstruction to unstinted daily enjoyments 
such as woman, apparells &c. 

On the extinction of these five defects 
five powers of men come into manifesta- 
tion. Just as the eye attains keen sight 
by the removal of eye diseases, so these 
powers manifest themselves in man on 
the disappearance of these five defects. 
He who has not these five powers is not 
fit to become God. The sixth defect is 
laughter. Laughter is excited by seeing 
or hearing or remembering something 
extra ordinary and laughter arises from 
the tendency to do such acts as bind. 
Both these causes are not found in Arhat, 
The Lord is all knowing and all seeing. 
There is nothing outside the limit of his 
knowledge by seeing, hearing, remember- 
ing which he may feel surprised. 
Therefore there is no laughter in Him. 
As regards binding acts He has none of 
them. He is not therefore contaminated 



( 112 ) 

by the defect of laughter because he who 
laughs must not be ail knowing, all see- 
ing, and free from the influences of 

action. The seventh defect is earthlv love 

j 

whch is not in God, He who has love 
must be attracted towards charming sound, 
beauty, dainty dishes, fragrant smells, 
delicate touch, &c. He who is attracted 
oaust have desire and he who has desire 
must be aggrieved on its non- realization. 
The eighth defect is aversion or hatred. 
He who is possessed of hatred against any 
person or things would not be happy be- 
cause of the feeling or hatred. This can- 
not be said of the blessed Arhat. The 
ninth defect is fear. He who has not dis- 
pelled his own fear, how can he be blessed 
Arhat. The tenth defect is disgust which 
arises at the sight of unclean things. As 
God's knowledge is universal He must be 
extremely unhappy if He were possessed 
of the feeling of disgust. Therefore this 
too is not a part of the qualifications of 
the Lord. The eleventh defect is sorrow. 
He who Jias sorrow cannot be God. The 



( 113 ) 

twelvth defect is lust. He who is lustful 
and indulges in the sexual pleasures o£ 
women can never be called God by any 
sensible man. The thirteenth defect is 
falsehood which leads to darkness and this 
cannot be attributed to God. The four- 
teenth defect is ignorance. He who is 
full of ignorance can never be all-knowing 
God, The fifteenth defect is sleep. He 
who sleeps has a gap in knowledge. The 
blessed Arhat is all-knowing, so He is 
beyond sleep. The sixteenth defect is 
desire. He who is full of desire cannot 
be Arhaf . The seventeenth and eighteenth 
defects are passion and anger. He who 
has passion and anger cannot be mediator. 
Such a man suffers from anger, pride, 
illusion and delusion. On the other hand 
the Lord is passionless, equally disposed 
towards friends and foe, having an equal 
measure of consideration for all beings. 
He makes none either happy or miserable. 
If He makes other happy or miserable, He 
cannot be passionless and full of com- 
passion. For these reasons the blessed 
Arhat cannot have passion and hatred. 



( 114 ) 

One who has any of these eighteen 
defects cannot be Arhat, because He is 
entirely free from them. Take an instance 
of a well polished diamond and a raw dia- 
mond that is still in mine. Although the 
diamond that is embedded in the mine is 
not bright yet it possesses all the qualities 
of a genuine diamond ; when it will be 
dressed and polished it will be consi- 
dered as one of the brightest jewels. 
Similarly the soul has powers to become 
God but owing to the impurities of eight 
kinds of actions that have accumulated 
in the course of ages, these powers have 
not become manifest. The soul that will 
be brightened by the instructions of a 
teacher subject to five attendant causes 
such as time &c, its devine powers will 
become manifest and that man will be- 
come a God. God is not any particular 
man; the innumerable souls that have 
attained liberation in the course of imme- 
morable ages or reached the position of 
Siddhas or will reach it in future have and 
will become God. Just as this world 
is eternal by reason of its unceasing con- 



< 115 ) 

tinuity so the Siddhahood is also eternal. 
Souls have been attaining liberation from 
time immemorial. If you entertain a 
doubt that since souls have been attaining 
liberation from time immemorial, than a 
time would come when all souls have at- 
tained liberation and the worlds will be 
depleted of all souls. This is not right, 
Things which are limited in calculation 
will have an end but things which are un- 
limited in name and form will never have 
an eud, for example, the earth and the 
sky. If you measure both these objects 
you will come to lhe end of the earth be- 
cause it is limited but you will never come 
to the end of the sky because it is unli- 
mited. Similarly the number of the souls 
in the world is unlimited and therefore 
there will be no end of the number of the 
iouls even if they went in salvation from 
eternity to eternity. If you say that the 
number of the souls must be calculable in 
the unlimited knowledge of God, because 
it cannot be unlimited knowledge if it 
could not count them, the answer is that 
one who has unlimited knowledge views 



( 116 ) 

unlimited things as unlimited and the 
limited ones as limited. For instance, 
the sky is unlimited; it is similarly regar- 
ded by God. If you do not accept this 
explanation then whatever view of God 
you advance will also have this fallacy. 
The believers in God hold God to be 
beginningless and endless. Does God 
see His own beginning or end or no? I.£ 
He sees them, then the worth of God is 
proved and it is also proved that there 
was no God before His birth. If God 
sees His own end then it is also possible 
that He would die. If you my that God 
does not see His beginning and end simply 
because God has no beginning or end, 
then on your own statement you will find 
that the knowledge of God is limited be- 
cause He cannot see His beginning or end. 
0, Dear, the number of the souls and 
the measurement of the sky are equally 
unlimited and therefore the Lord too does 
not see their end. He sees the absence of 
that which is not and the presence of that 
which is. 



( 117 ) 

This has been explained because it has a 
bearing on the subject. 

68. Q. — What are the views about future life of 
the followers of other religions ? 



A. The soul is considered to be beginning- 
less by many men. According to this 
belief the soul having given up its gross 
body in the past assumes a variety of new 
bodies according to its good or bad actions. 
The future life of soul is its giving up 
body in one life and assuming a new body 
in the next. According as the present 
birth of a soul is determined by its past 
life so will its future life be determined 
bv the actions of present life and those of 
the preceding lives. When all the actions 
have extinguished in a life, then there 
will be no more future life. Those who 
believe that the soul is not beginningless 
but one created by the God are wrong be- 
en use we have already discussed as to the 
ability of God in such matters. Nothing 
can be produced in the world without a 



( 118 ) 

material cause, therefore, the Jains, the 
Buddhists, the followers of the Vedas, 
Nyaya, Vaisheshika and Miinansa philo- 
sophies believe that the next birth of man 
is determined by the actions of his past 
life. Many others believe that the future 
form will be the same as in the present 
life j. #., a man will be reborn a man, a 
woman a woman, an animal an animal and 
so on and so forth. This belief is also 
according to the Vedas but it is not right, 
because it is seen in the world that if a 
corn rubbed with linsed oil is sown in the 
earth it will produce several kinds of 
grain. Similarly there are many plants 
and vegetables which can be produced by 
the combination of many other things as 
described in Ayurveda. In the Jaina 
Shastras many instances are given where 
the combination of several things can pro- 
duce a certain species of life, for instance 
a serpant, or a diamond, gold &c. The 
above statement is also borne out by the 
conclusions of the modern science. It is 
consequently not established that an effect 
will be of the same form as its cause. 



< 119 ) 

This subject is further discussed in the 
Visheshavashyaka Sutras, Some hold 
that a iion whose nature is to kill animals 
will be reborn a greater criminal. In his 
next birth he will be born a still greater 
criminal. In this manner he will get 
worse and still worse and will thus have 
no opportunity to be born as a man. The 
answer to this argument is that according 
to the views of the Jaina Shastras such as 
Pragyapan&, Bhagavati &c. man of all the 
forms of life can assume innumerable 
births according to his good or bad deeds. 
The action that is uppermost in one life 
determines the birth of a man in his next 
life. There is no established rule that all 
the previous actions good or bad will 
immediately be attended by their corres- 
ponding results for example, a thief who 
commits theft sometimes gets an imme- 
diate punishment and sometimes after a 
long time and sometimes not at all in this 
life. Similarly some men reap the con- 
sequence of good or bad actions imme- 
diately, some later on in life, some in 
next life and others in remote lives to 



( 120 } 

come. These actions are of various and 
complicated forms and are fully described 
in such works as Shat Karmagranth, Pan- 
cha-Sangraha, Karmaprakriti and others. 
The study of these works will bear out 
the truth of my statement. 

The main conclusion is that according to 
their actions, virtuous or wicked, all be- 
ings will be reborn in their next lives. 
Now as regards the Charvakas or the 
atheists who consider that life is the pro- 
duct of 4 elements and who do not be- 
lieve in the past or future life nor in the 
existence of heaven or hell &c , I proceed 
to repudiate their doctrine as given in the 
commentry on Nandi surras. The Char- 
vakas or the atheists say that since there 
is no soul there is no meaning in the 
mutual quarrels of religionists over it. 
They further say that there being no soul 
the followers of Jainism, Buddhism, San- 
khya, Naiyavika, Vaisheshika and Jaimini 
philosophies i. e. six philosophies simply 
lead man to confusion and perplexity 
and make them give up their enjoyments, 



( 121 ) 

In fact there is no soul and therefore 
their creed is the best. If there is a soul, 
what proof is there of its existence ? The 
answer to this argument is that soul is 
proved by the self consciousness of the 
man. 

The consciousness of man 'is not the 
result of any material forces. If it is so 
then the firmness such as there is in the 
earth ou^ht to always prevail everywhere, 
but this is not the case, because we do 
not find any consciousness in substance 
such as iron, dead bodies &c. 

69. Q.— In stone etc. and also in a dead body 
there is life but it is merely in the form 
of a force and hence it is invisible. 

A. This statement of yours is not correct 
because it involves the non-solution of 
two difficulties. Is that force antagonistic 
to life or is it life itself? If you say that 
it is antagonistic to life, then it is not 
right to say that life is in the form of a 
force in as much as without the existence 



( 122 ) 

of a garment what is in the form of gar- 
ment is only an earthen jar. 

If you take the second point, that 
force is life itself ; then the question 
arises as to the cause of its invisibility. 
If you say that it is not visible on account 
of a cover, it is not right to say so because 
a cover is another name for obstruction. 
Then the question arises whether that 
obstruction is the non-existence of the 
proposed change, or is another form of 
change or is something other than ele- 
mentals. It is not the non-existence of 
the proposed change, because it being 
light it has no force of obstruction. If 
it is heavy it would become a form of 
feeling and so apart from earth etc. 

The Bhutas such as earth etc. serve 
as manifestations of chaiianya and are 
not obstructions. Hence obstructibility 
is not proved. If you say that it is ano- 
ther form of the change it is also wrong 
to say so, because it being of the nature 
of elemental is the manifestator of life 
like elementals and not its obstruction. 



( 123 ) 

If you say that it is something quite 
distinct from elements, that is equally 
wrong to say because in believing it to be 
quite distinct from elementals the destruc- 
tion of the number of the elements would 
be the result. It is also to be noticed 
whether life is the attribute of eich parti- 
cular element or of all elements combined. 
It is not the attribute of each particular 
element separately, because it is not so 
visible. * Every atom does not appear to 
be endowed with consciousness. If it is 
in each atom then a man would have a 
collection of a thousand consciousness of 
a different kind and it would not bear a 
single form. But apparently it bears a 
single form. 

viz , I see and I do. 

Thus the whole body appears to be owned 
by one. If you believe in the attribute 
of a collective body it is false as it is not 
present in each individual atom. What 
is untrue from each particular point of 
view cannot be true collectively, for ins- 
tance, the existence of oil in the indivi- 
dual atoms of sand. 



f 124 ) 

If you say that every ingredient of 
wine does not possess the energy of wine 
and that a collection thereof does possess 
such a power, and that same is the case 
with life and that there is no fallacy in 
such a belief, than I would say that it is 
not right to say so, because every ingre- 
dient of wine possesses sweetness etc. 
conducive of the energy of wine. The 
sugar cane juice from the flowers of 
dhatki becomes intoxicating to a small 
extent. But life does not similarly appear 
in elementals. Consequently it cannot 
exist in a combination of elements. If 
what is non-existent in any separate form 
becomes existent in the combination of 
such forms, then such combinations can 
achieve all. There is another thing to 
be taken into consideration. If you be- 
lieve life to be an attribute, you should 
necessarily believe the attribute and its 
subject to be identical. If you do not be- 
lieve them to be identical, then it is pos- 
sible to consider water and hardness as 
subject and attribute which is not the 
case. It is not right to say that elemen- 



( 125 ) 

tals are subjects, in as much as they are 
antagonistic to chaitanya. For instance 
attribute of consciousness is knowledge 
and it is formless but an elemental is of 
quite a distinct form. How can the rela- 
tion of subject and attribute be possible? 
Nor is life the cause of elernentals. It 
being quite distinct cannot bear the rela- 
tion of cause and effect. It is also re- 
markable that if an element be the cause 
of life the whole world would be full of 
living beings. If you say that the whole 
world is not full of living beings on ac- 
count of absence of the transformation of 
a real existance then the question arises 
why does not the transformation of the 
real existence appear every where. The 
phenomenon of the transformed elernen- 
tals can at the best be proved only an ins- 
trumental cause and it being so, how can 
it be proved that it is manifest in one 
place and not manifest in another. What 
is the form of that transformed reality? 
If you say that its form is hardness, then 
how weevils etc. become born in wood 
and similar substance. It would show 



( 126 ) 

that life exists even where there is hard- 
ness. Tins is not tenable in all cases* 
There are exceptional cases. Even with- 
out any presence of hardness, such crea- 
tures as spring from perspiration exist. 

Another point is that animals of 
the same species are of different colours 
and sizes. Animals that execrete dung 
ire some black, some yellowish, and so 
on and their sizes also differ. If 
elementals are instrumental cause of life, 
then all animals of the same species 
ought to have the same colour and size 
but this is not the case. Therefore it 
will have to be accepted that it is 
only the souls which take forms confor- 
mable to their actions. If you contend 
that if there is a soul, why is it not seen 
when transmigrating. It appears in con- 
sciousness only in a body, and when the 
body is destroyed it is not perceptible. Does 
it not prove that there is no soul? It is per 
ceptible only in tbe body as consciousness 
which is the product of the body upon 
which it depends for its existence. It 



( 127 ) 

does not exist independently and is like 
a picture on the wall, which disappears 
with the destruction of the wall nor can 
be transferred to another wall. Similarly 
is the case with consciousness. This 
argument is fallacious. The soul is form- 
less and the internal body is very subtle 
and it is hence that the soul though 
migrating with its subtle karman body 
is not seen. It can be perceived only by 
its characteristics. A creature though 
just born has an idea of individuality. It 
runs away at the sight of its enemy. The 
individuality is determined by its pre- 
vious tendencies. So long as the good 
or evil of a thing is not perceived it does 
not abstract or repel any one. 

The propensities which we see at 
the birth of a creature are the result of 
the tendencies of the past life. The trans- 
migration of soul is therefore proved. 

How is the knowledge of soul to be 
arrived at by an inference when its move- 
ments are not visibly seen. 

Your statement is not correct, The 



( 128 ) 

direct evidence does not reach the subject 
of inference. The learned accept the 
application of direct evidence to objects 
which are of the same nature. 

The illustration of a wall-picture 
which you gave is also inapplicable. The 
picture is lifeless, the act of going is not 
natural, the soul is conscious and migrates 
by the force of its actions. These being 
the discrepancies, how does your illustra- 
tion apply to the subject to be explained. 
Just as Devdutta having dwelt in a vil- 
lage for a time leaves it and removes to 
another village, so the soul having given 
up a body in a particular region, migrates 
to another region and assumes a different 
body. Your statement about the sensa- 
tion being the product of body is not 
correct. It may be that perceptions such 
as we have through our senses such as 
eyes &c are partly due to the body owing 
to their coneern with the organs of senses 
but it is absolutely wrong to contend 
that the mental knowledge springs from 
the body. Does the mental knowledge 



( 129 ) 

spring from the body in the form of a 
sense-orgau or without such a form, or 
does it spring from such outward bodily 
appertances as hair, nails &c. The first 
question is not right If it springs in 
the form of a sense-organ^ its knowledge 
ought to be limited to the present per- 
ceptions only because the perceptions of 
the sense-organs limit themselves only 
to the present phenomena. On this as- 
sumption t[ie mental knowledge would 
limit itself only to the present phenomena 
as the sense-organs. It is only when 
the eye sees a form that it forms its idea, 
not at any other time. The presence 
of the form is then the cause of its per- 
ception. The mental knowledge does 
not depend upon the presence of a form 
and it is not therefore limited to any 
particular time. The same argument 
applies in the case of other sense-organs. 
The meutal knowledge does not therefore 
depend upon the phenomena of any par- 
ticular time. If it does not spring in 
the form of a sense-organ, the position 
is still faulty for it is ULCQiitcicus. Ad 



( 130 ) 

regards the hair, nails &c being the cause 
of mental knowledge it would suffice to 
say that since they never appear affected 
by mental thoughts they can never be the 
saidr cause. If the mental knowledge is 
bound by the hair, nails &c it is capable 
of being totally destroyed by their re- 
moval. If the hair, nails &c. are hurt, 
the mental knowledge should also receive 
a corresponding hurt but this is not the 
ca^e ; therefore this third argument also 
falls to the ground. 

Moreover subtility of sense, logical 
distinctions and acuteness of memory 
are features of mental knowledge but 
these are cultivated by constant practice. 
The same books when studied frequently 
and closely show deeper and deeper 
meanings and the acuteness of memory is 
also cultivated. In this manner when 
one book is studied and its meaning tho- 
roughly grasped and the memory sharp- 
ened, it leads to an easy understanding 
pf other books and the memory is deve- 
loped. Such mental phenomena are often 



( 131 ) 

seen which are acquired by constant prac- 
tice. Sometimes such mental charac- 
teristics are seen natural and not acquired 
by practice but practice and exercise are 
the chief elements. Cause and effect 
move in unison. Causes though invisible 
certainly exist as in the case of pilgrimage 
of soul to another world. Although the 
body is liable to destruction and extinc- 
tion it can nevertheless help towards the 
progress of knowledge. With the des- 
truction of the body, knowledge is not 
extinguished. Look at the fire and the 
pot when the fire ceases to burn the pot is 
not destroyed. Similar is the case with 
gold and fire. When the body is des- 
troyed, knowledge no doubt receives 
some shock but is not radically destroyed. 
If you accept that knowledge is destroyed 
with the body, then with the burning 
up of the body in the cremation ground 
all knowledge will ha\e extinguished. 
Can it be explained why does it not 
appear in a dead body which has not yet 
been burned. 



( 132 ) 

If you say that.Pr&n and Apan are 
also causes of knowledge which ceases 
when these causes do not exist. This 
position is not correct. Plan and Apan 
cannot be the causes of knowledge. It 
is the knowledge which brings them into 
action. Pran and Apan for their motions 
depend upon the meagreness or intensity 
of the desire of a man. 

If the body is the cause of the Pran 

and Apan and Pran and A pan the cause 

of knowledge, then the action of Pran 

and Apan will not be at the command of 

one's desire. If Prau and Apan are the 

causes of knowledge then the degrees of 

intensity will produce corresponding 

proportions of knowledge because it is 

commonly established that an effect 

varies with its cause in its extent or dgree. 

For example a pot will be large or small 

according to the large or small quantity 

of the earth employed to make it. Jf 

this is not the case then there is no 

relation of cause and effect. You are 

not unaware that your knowledge does 



< 133 ) 

not increase or decrease with the increase 
or decrease of the Pran or Apan. On 
the other hand the contrary is the 
case as may be seen at the time of the 
death of a man when the Pran and Apan 
are so much in play while the knowledge 
or consciousness is reduced to a zero. 1£ 
you say that the increase of the Pran 
and Apan at the time of death is due to 
the humours of the wind and biliousness 
&c. whicli vitiate the body and do not 
allow consciousnes to come into play, 
This statement is incorrect. If this is 
so a dead man ought to be alive because 
after the death the humours of the wind 
and biliousness &c. disappear and the 
body is also free from fever and other 
diseases and the absence of these ailments 
means health. Since the body is healthy 
in such a state it ought to be alive. If 
this is not so then the body is not the 
cause of consciousness, and it has not 
any relation of cause and effect with the 
mind. If a dead man were to get alive 
we would believe the body to be the 
cause of consciousness* 



( 134 ) 

70. Q. — Your argument about a dead man get- 
ting alive is improper. Although the 
ailments which vitiate the body at the 
time of death disappear, the vitiating 
effect which they create in the body do 
not disappear just as the effect caused 
by fire in the wood never disappears 
although the fire extinguishes. 



~o" 



A.— This is not right. Changes are of 2 kinds. 
One kind of change altogether disappears 
and the other does not. The second 
kind of change is caused by the fire in 
the wood when it is burnt and the first 
kind of change is caused by it, in the 
gold when it is burnt. The humours of 
wind &c. are such as disappear according 
to the science of medicine. If they do 
not disappear then the science of medicine 
is wrong. Moreover it cannot be that 
ailments which disappear while the man 
is alive do not disappear when he is dead. 
A change cannot have two aspects in 
the same place. 

71. Q — Diseases are of two kinds— curable 
and incurable. The curable diseases 



( 135 ) 

are removed by treatment but the incur- 
able diseases never disappear. Does it not 
show that there are two aspect s of diseases ? 

A. — This too is not right. According to you 
there can be no incurable disease. The 
incurability of the disease means the 
extinction of life. During an ordinary 
disease a man sometimes dies by the 
quackery of a physician and sometimes he 
does not die. The diseases which are the 
result of evil actions of man are not cured 
by any medicines. Both these diseases 
are to be found only in the religions of 
those who believe in the teachings of the 
Lord but not in the religion of those like 
you who believe only in the elements. 
Sometimes a medicine is efficacious in 
curing the effects of ailments but some- 
time in the absence of a, physician an ordi- 
nary disease becomes incurable. Owing 
to the absence of a physician and medicine, 
a disease is aggravated and ends only in 
the death of a man. Sometimes a man 
suddenly dies as soon as his ailments 
disappear and sometimes a man does not 



( 136 ) 

die though seriously afflicted with virulent 
diseases. 

These things can have no place in 3'our 
creed. According to our doctrine, a man 
lives his fixed age though afflicted with 
serious diseases but when his fixed age has 
reached its limit he dies though there are 
no diseases ailing him. The body is not 
therefore the cause of consciousness. There 
U another point. Do you believe the body 
to be a concomittant or material couse of 
consciousness or knowledge ? If you believe 
in the former, we too consider the body to 
be the means of death and to some extent 
the cause of knowledge. If you believe 
in the latter, the position is wrong. A 
material cause is that which communicates 
its changes to its effects just as the earth 
and the pot. When the body is affected, 
the sense of feeling is not affected. On 
the other hand, the mind is affected a 
good deal by fear, anxiety, grief &c even 
when the body is all right. The body is 
not therefore the material cause of the 
sense of feeling. 



( 537 ) 

This statement also disposes of the 
argument that the life of the parents is 
the material cause of the life of the child. 
When the parents are affected by ailments, 
the children are not similarly affected. 
But a material cause always follows its 
effect and cannot be separated from it just 
as the earth and the pot. If the life of 
the parents is inseparable from the life of 
the child, the latter's life should have a 
similar relation. This will show that the 
qualities or effects of elemental*- are not 
feelings. It also proves that there is a 
soul. Further information regarding the 
• creed of the Cbarvakas is to be found in 
such works as Sammati-tarka, SySdvadar- 
atnakara &c. 

72. Q.~ What do the old Shastras say with regard 
to the social and friendly dealings of. 
human beings among themselves ? 

A. — A man should have friendly feelings to- 
wards human beings, do good to them, 
assist them in trouble, preach true Law 
(truth) if he knows, should not take 



( 138 ) 

pride in his *high' caste, should be hospi- 
table to them by giving food etc. 

73. Q. — What is in fact the relation of man with 
God? 

A. — The relation is that of an instructor and 
the instructed. 

74 Q.— What should man do for God ? 

A. — God does not want anything, but devoted 
men should in order to wipe off their 
evil actions, worship God by installing 
his image of the form such as He had 
when He attained liberation while living 
in the world, invoke God in that idol by 
their feeling of devotion, and attributing 
His nature to it. Although the idol is 
not God, yet through that idol, God is 
worshipped. Thus an idol becomes a 
sort of memorial of the God. All the 
different religionists say that their respec- 
tive sacred books are the words of God. 
The Christian, Mahommadens and Brah* 
mins etc. say so with regard to their Bible, 
Kuran and Vedas etc. respectively. The 
Christians take oath by taking the Bible 



< 139 ) 

in their hands or holding it over their 
heads. The Musalmans respect their 
Kuran very much. As a matter of fact 
these books are nothing else than paper 
and ink. But in order to recollect the 
knowledge of God, the murti (form) of 
letters is made by persons with their own 
hands and they are respected. As people 
understand the knowledge of God with 
the help of those letters which have been 
written by them, similarly with the help 
of idols the form of God who attained 
liberation while living in the world is 
apprehended. 

The maps of countries are drawn on 
small and large sized papers and the 
teachers point to their pupils in those 
maps saying, "Look here, this is Italy, 
this is Russia, this is America, this is 
India etc." The pupils do not believe 
that the very place upon which their 
teacher kept a finger is Italy or Russia 
etc. But these maps help them to under- 
stand the real countries Italy, Russia etc. 
Similarly we also do not believe that an 



( 140 ) 

idol is really the God, but that these idols 
help us in understanding God the preacher 
of: truth. For this reason we must believe 
in (the efficacy of) the idols o£ God. 
Those who do not believe in the idols of: 
God, must not respect their religious 
books, nor should they take oath on them. 
The belief in idols includes belief in books. 
For this reason, we must invoke God 
through aforesaid idols, remember His 
virtues, pronounce that He is free from 
18 defects and is undefiled. If you 
believe in this wny, then it is not an idol 
but God Himself. Taking God himself 
to be present there and knowing that He 
is from eternity the preacher of true 
righteousness (Dharma) and the doer of 
the greatest good, we must worship Him 
in accordance with the forms fixed for it. 
There are different forms of worship, I 
give here only a very brief account of a 
particular form of worship called ashta- 
prakari ptijd or eightfold devotion. 

1. First, wash the image of God with water 
full of this thought u O God Arhat ! as I 



( 141 ) 

remove the dirt caused by dust etc, by 
means of water and produce a cooling 
effect, your worship may also remove the 
dirt of all' my actions Karmas and the 
removal thereof make manifest the real 
nature which is shital (cool). 5 ' 

2. Then prepare a mixture of sandal wood, 
safron and camphor by grinding them and 
smear it over the idol with a prayer in 
your mind "0 Bhagwan ! as this smearing 
removes bad smell, your worship may 
remove also my bad v&sria (desire) which 
I hold from eternity." 

3. Then take the best kinds of flowers giving 

good smell and make an offering thereof 
before God contemplating in your mind 
u Lord ! these flowers are the arrows of 
Kdmadeva (cupid), I makean offering there- 
of before you in order that I may for ever 
be liberated from the sufferings of Kdma- 
deva (passionate desire, cupid)." 

4. Then take fragrant dhftp (incense) and 
keep it upon fire so that the vapour may 
issue, saying in your mind, "0 God ! as 



( H2 ) 

this incense is burning in fire, all my 
vices may also be annihilated by bhakti 
(worship) and as the vapours of incense 
are going upward, similarly I may also 
attain higher life." 

5. Then light a lamp with ghi (of cow's milk) 

and keep it before God saying in your 
mind "0 Lord ! as lamp-light removes 
darkness, in consequence of your worship, 
the lamp of perfect and pure knowledge 
may become lighted in my heart so that 
the darkness of ignorance may be 
removed." 

6. Then take good rice and keep it before 
God contemplating that the worship with 
rice may confer upon you eternal happi- 
ness, 

7. Take all sorts of good pakwdn (Cooked 
food} in a tray and keep it before God 
saying in your mind "0 God ! I have been 
eating it from eternity, now I make an 
offering of the whole of it to you so 
that I may never feel hungry." 



( 143 ) 

8. Take good fruits and put them before God 
thinking in your mind, "0 God ! in conse- 
quence of your worship I may bear 
the fruit of mukti (highest stage of 
attainment)." 

After performing the worship with the 
aforesaid dravya (articles), one should 
make chaitya-vandana (a bow to all the 
Jain temples repeating God's virtues) 
i. e. eulogise God by mentioning his vir- 
tues in the way of saluting Him. He 
should praise His name in so far as is in 
his power to do, spread his teaching 
(Dharma) and improve himself by going 
on pilgrimage and performing rathayatra 
(taking the image of God in a chariot 
along with a procession) and promulgate 
the Dharma preached*by Him in different 
countires. These are some of the ways in 
which the devout should worship God. 

75. Q. — Does man in reality possess or not, the 
attributes of Dharma ? 

A.— Yes, he does possess those attributes in 
reality in as much as Dharma (essential 



( H4 ) 

quality) conveys only the idea of Dharma 
(one who makes Dharma) as sweetness in 
misri (a kind of sweet). The very term 
Dharma proves iteelf the connection of 
Dharma and Dharmi. 

. Q. — How does the connection of man with 
God appear in this world what is ig 
in re ility ? 

A*— Many people believe that God is their 
father. For this reason they believe that 
the connection between God and man is 
that of father and son. Many believe 
that God is their creator and that they arc 
entirely in His mind, that He makes them 
do what He wills and that man can not do 
anything, borne say that this world is 
the plaything of God and that He is seeing 
this fun. Some say that God h#a created 
this universe and that He maintains it. 
Some believe that God makes them suffer 
the consequences of their actions. The 
Jains say that this universe is eternal, 
that God is our guide and saves us from 
evil path. Thess aw homo of the diffe- 
rent beliefs. 



( H5 ) 

77 Q — What is the highest achievement of 
Dharma and what are the characteristics 
of Dharma ? 

A. — The highest achievement of Dharma con- 
sists in lifting man ultimately to the 
highest position of a Siddha or God after 
it has extinguished his various physical 
and mental afflictions consequent upon 
birth and death. The characteristics of 
Dharmi are ten : — 

(1) human life, (2) birth in a civilized 
country, (3> noble family, (4) long life, 

(5) possession of complete five senses 9 

(6) wisdom, (7) good health, (8) contact of 
a true teacher, (9) hearing of the noble 
teaching preached by God free from 
eighteen faults, and (10) belief in the 
above said teaching and acting thereupon. 

F8 Q.— What are the ways of worship and obser- 
vance of Dhanng. according to different 
religions ? 

A.™The worship according to Jains has 
already been described above m copnpctio^ 



( 146 ) 

with the eightfold mode of worship. 
There are two modes of Dharmaorduty — 
the duty of a householder and that of a 
recluse. First- take the duty of a house 
holder. 

A householder ought always to worship 
God three times a day, ought not to injure 
visible animate objects, to speak false- 
hood, to commit serious theft, and to have 
sexual intercourse with another's wife, 
ought to limit a desire for possession, 
regulate his going abroad, avoid taking 
22 kinds of non-eatables such as meat, 
strong drink etc and 32 kinds of ananU 
kaya, ought to avoid (so far as practicable) 
15 forms of bad business and 4 kinds of 
undesirable injuries, ought to observe 
devotion for an hour putting on elean 
clothes, whenever he gets an opportunity 
to do so, and give up all kinds of vicious 
acts, remember the qualifications of panch 
parmeshti, acquire education, observe 14 
vows every day, abstaining from indulging 
in 4 things viz. (1) taking food, (2) 
beautifying body, (3) sexual intercourse 



( 147 ) 

and (4) business, on the two 8th, one 5th, 
loth and 30th days of a month etc. ought 

to lead the life of a sadhu (recluse) by 
doing Dharma, meditating, remembering 
the qualifications of panchpe?meshti etc. 
for 24 hours, L £., perform what is called 
poshad karma. He ought to give alms to 
a deserving person, to the needy and also 
to the persons in trouble, carry on busi- 
ness according to rules of justice. This 
is a short description of the mode of a 
householder's life according to Jainism. 
Secondly I briefly deal with the duty of 
a recluse. 

A sadhu— & recluse ought not to injure 
any life, ought not to speak any kind of 
falsehood, ought not to commit any kind 
of theft, ought not to indulge in any kind 
of sexual intercourse, and ought not to 
have a desire for any thing. He should 
entirely abstain from these five things. 
He ought not to stay anywhere consider- 
ing it to be his own place, ought to take 
in begging madhuhari bhikshd free from 
42 defects, ought to regard a friend and 



( 148 ) 

an enemy, gold and stone, woman and 
grass equally, he should neither love nor 
hate anything. He ought to be prepared 
to bear 22 kinds of afflictions and 16 
troubles which befall him. He ought to 
desire neither life nor fear death. He 
ought to check the five sexual desires. He 
ought to be free from anger, pride, attach- 
ment:, avarice. He ought to observe 18000 
characteristics of shilanga (chastity) This 
is the mode in which a monk ought to 
lead his life. 

The other religions describe many 
methods which are the figments of fancies ; 
we need not therefore describe them. 

79 Q # -—What are the true and real distinguish- 
ing marks of a Dhannic (pious) life and 
worldly life ? 

^. —The true and real marks of worldly life 
are as follows ;— 

One who earns money by lawful means ? 
admires a good act, marries in the family 
pf a inan of a different gQira equal to him 



( 149 ) 

in position, character etc, fears vicious 
acts, does not do anything against the 
fashion of his country, does not speak ill 
of any one, more particularly does not in- 
habit in too public or too private a place, 
lives in the neighbourhood of a good 
person, does not live in the house which 
has several passages for egress and ingress, 
lives in the company of a religious man, 
serves his parents, does not live at a place 
which is the source of dispute, does not 
do that work which is considered bad by 
the public, spends according to his income, 
lives up to his means, is possessed of the 
eight attributes of intelligence, always 
bears dharma, does not take food again 
until the previous food has been digested, 
eats contentedly at the proper time, prac- 
tises virtue and has recourse to wordly 
pleasure and business in a way not detri- 
mental to any of these three, supplies ac- 
cording to his means food, clothes etc to a 
holy man or a poor man who comes to his 
house, does not go against the propriety 
of time and place, does every work to the 
best of his ability, worships, serves one 



( 150 ) 

who follows great vows and is a learned 
man, maintains those who deserve support, 
is a prudent and farsighted man who 
knows much and is always grateful to 
him who has done anything for him, is 
loved by all, is submissive, merciful, is of 
agreeable nature, is doing good to others, 
is resolute in giving up the company of 6 
inner enemies viz, passion, anger, avarice, 
pride, mada and joy, controls the 
contact of the senses with their objects. 
One who observes the aforesaid 35 things 
is said to truly possess all the attributes 
of a householder. The attributes of a 
Dbarmic person have already been descri* 
bed under the head of duties of householder 
and saint. 

80 Q. — What power does the soul of human 
being possess to get a high position ? 

A. — The high positions are two, one secular 
and the other spiritual. The secular posi- 
tion are such as of Indra, Chakravarti, 
Vasudeva, Baldeva, Mandlik Raja etc. 
The doing of the aforesaid 35 things en« 
able one to attain this position. 



( 151 ) 

The powers in soul to attain the spiri- 
tual position viz that of God, are the 
ways in which a recluse should lead his 
life. 

81 Q. — What are such acts of Dharma as are be- 

yond controversy ? 

A,— No believer doubts in the goodness of 
such things as showing mercy towards 
living beings, truth speaking, non-stealing, 
abstinence from adultery, forgiving, chari- 
table temper, kind heartedness, content- 
ment, doing good to other etc. 

82 Q. — Is it essential to study the sacred books 

of different religions ? 

A.-— The reason why it is necessary to study 
the sacred books of different religions is 
that one who does so impartially and 
without any prejudice would find out the 
real truth. 

83 Qv— What are the rules and conditions gov- 

erning such a study ? 

A.— Before you study a sacred book, you must 
see that its author is free from 18 faults, 



( 152 ) 

that there are no contradictions in his 
statements, that whatever he says is not 
contrary to what is visible in the world 
by direct proof and that it stands the 
three tests. 

You must believe in all the contents of 
the book which like gold stands these 
tests. The tests are these. 1st rub the 
gold over Kasauti (test — stone), 2nd by 
examining it by boring it and 3rd by 
making it red hot in fire. The price o£ 
gold which stands these three tests is fit 
to be accepted. Similarly the sacred book 
which prohibits the doing of all sinful acts 
and dictates the ways of acting upon what 
is contrary to sinful acts i. e. a book which 
for the purpose of liberation prohibits the 
doing of sinful acts and dictates the 
way of acting upon what is contrary to 
them is called by Tirthankar Bhagwan 
a Kask Shudha Shastra. Thus a 
book which for the purpose of mukti 
dictates observance of meditation, 
study, mercy, truth shil (chastity, mora- 
lity, good conduct), contentment etc, all 



( 153 ) 

combined and prohibits doing injur? to 
living being, speaking false hood, com- 
mitting theft, keeping wife, having posse- 
ssions, anger, arrogance, Mdyd (illusion), 
avarice, etc, is a Kash shudha Shdstra. 
The Sh&stra which deals with arth 
(wealth), ham (passion) combined, and is 
full of stories and shows the ways to 
mokshha in a secondary way is not kash 
shudha shdstra. The shastra which deals 
with all the constructive and destructive 
methods of worship and conduct is called 
achheda shudha shdstra. A saint should 
take care of the living beings even when 
he answers the calls of nature. It is most 
proper to take care of living beings in 
doing a very dhdrmic act. 

The shdstra which prohibits the doing 
of an act for one purpose and dictates its 
doing for another purpose cannot be called 
chhed {shudhi- shdstra). For instance the 
Vedas which when dealing with the ques- 
tion of liberation prohibits injury to living 
beings and when dealing with the question 
of worldly possession sanction such an 



( 154 ) 

injury. The shdstra which is tested by 
the fire of the real qualities of things as 
described and tested from all the points 
of views and is found to be free from the 
black spots of superstition is called a tap 
shuddhi shdstra. The shdslra which des- 
cribes the attributes of things from a single 
point of view, is not called t&p shuddhi 
shdstra. The aforesaid tests relate to the 
sh&shtras. It is also a necessary condition 
that the author of the true shdstra must 
be faultless and omniscient. 

84 Q.— What traditions are there on the subject 
and what is their present form ? 

A, Shuk alias Parivrajak, son of VySsaji, 
ascertained the real truth from muni 
Th&vachchaputra, descipleof Lord Arisht- 
nemi and accepted the true dharmd. 
It is so described in Sri Gnata S&tra. 
The Niravalika SAtra says that Somal 
Brahman learned 14 sciences (4 Vedas, 
Ganges, dharma rnimdnsd, Tarka or MayS, 
and the Parana) and after enquiries accep- 
ted the householder's duties grahasth dhar* 



f 155 ) 

ma. The Bhagavati Sutra says that Somal 
Brahman learned 14 sciences and after en- 
quiring about the elements accepted the 
Jaina religion. Shayyambhava Bhat, the 
author of the Dasha-Vaik&lika Sutra gave 
up Mimausak religion and became the des- 
cipleof MuniPrabhava Swami. The follow- 
ing 11 Brahmans (1) Indra Bhuti, (2) 
AgniBhuti, (3) Vayu Bhuti, (4) Wyakt 
Swami, (5) Sudharma, (6) Mandit Putra, 
(7) Maurya Putra, (8) Akampita, (9) Achal 
Bhrata, (10) Metarya and (11) Prabhas 
along with the 4400 desciples — all learned 
in 14 sciences — ascertaining the truths, 
took Diksha (initiation) from the venerable 
Lord Mahavira the 24th Tirthankara 
and became his desciples. 

85 Q.— What effects have the dead religions of 
the world upon mankind at present ? 

A. — The Jaina, Veda or Mim&nsak, Naiyavik, 
Sankhya, Patanjal and Buddha religions 
are counted among the oldest religions of 
India. Now all the above religions excep- 
ting Buddhism have their existence in 



( 156 ) 

India. All of these excepting Jainism 
are almost dying. In other countries 
where the Dharma of the Karma-Kandi 
Mimansak&s has disappeared, its effect is 
that people make sacrifices by killing ani- 
mals and inorder to please God make offer- 
ings of skin, flesh, and blood by killing bul- 
locks etc. as is described in Tauret and Quran 
etc. Also the book named Iliad says in 
its account of war that Hector and other 
great warriors made sacrifices to gods by 
killing different kinds of animals. All 
this appears to be the remnant of Miman- 
sak religion. The sujism among Mohamme- 
dans appears to be the relic of Vedantism. 
In India some people of the Brabman 
caste etc have given up Rinsak-yagn and 
avoid flesh eating and drinking etc ; this 
appears to be the after-effect of Jainism 
and Buddhism. In other countries also 
the existence of virtuous acts such as mercy 
etc appears to be the remnant of Jainism 
and Buddhism. 

86 Q. — What position does God of the whole 
universe hold according to every religion 



( 157 ) 

in human progress ? God is just. Accor- 
ding to every religion, God is the Lord 
of the whole universe. Then how is it 
that notwithstanding the differences in 
human progress in different people in 
different countries, there is no contradic- 
tion among them with regard to God's 
nature of being just. How do the differ. 
ent religions account for God on this 
point. 

A, — All the different religions believe that God 
is just and this is true because God natu- 
rally possess the quality of nyaya-shilata 
(being just). But the belief of the people 
that God like Government officials admi- 
nisters justice to all the living beings is 
against the shdstrds of the Jain religion 
and is also against logical conclusions. 
For instance a Baniya (trader) possess 
1000 gold mohurs and for that reason he 
feels himself very happy. Then a thief 
comes and takes away all those mohurs. 
On the Baiiiya's making a protest the 
thief wounds his body by a sword. There- 
upon the Baniya keeps quiet and the thief 
goes away wiih the money and feels him- 



( 158 ) 

self very happy. Now supposing that the 
Baniya was feeling very happy by reason 
of possessing 1000 gold mohurs, that this 
was given to him by just God in conse- 
quence of his doing good actions, that in 
consequence of his doing sinful acts God 
punished him in this way that the thief 
took away gold mohurs and wounded the 
Baniya by a sword. But the question 
arises whether God made him suffer the 
consequences with or without a nimit 
(means). He cannot be said to suffer the 
consequences without any nimit because 
in the Baniya suffering the consequences 
of his bad actions the thief and sword etc 
were the nimit. Now if it be taken for 
granted that God puts all causes into 
motion, then God would be proved to 
cause others to do evil acts such as theft 
etc. If God does not put nimits into 
motion then God cannot be proved to be 
just and the giver of reward and punish- 
ment. If without peoples' doing good or 
bad acts, God gives reward or punishment 
to them or creates many in royal family, 
healthy in life, in very comfortable cir- 



( 159 ) 

cumstances, satisfies all desires etc, creates 
some miserable from pregnancy during 
the whole life, mentally and physically in 
pain, hungry, suffering from chronic dis- 
eases ; no intelligent, man would call such 
God to be just, merciful, impartial, having 
an equal eye upon all. If God gives com- 
fort or pain to all living beings according 
to their good or bad actions, then this 
would be proved to be eternal and God 
would be proved to be unjust and tire 
faults such as theft, immorality, speaking 
falsehood etc would be imputed to Him, 

87 Q. — You should put to God Himself the ques- 
tion of creation of the universe as to how 
and wherefrom He created the universe 
and why did He create happy and miser- 
able lives ? 

A.— If God were to say to us that He created 
the universe and that He created happy 
and miserable lives not consequent upon 
their good and bad actions, then we 
would put the question to Him. But God 
never tells us those things. Hence we 



( 160 ) 

put these questions to you. Consequently 
God is not the administrator of justice 
(to the living beings) in the universe, nor 
does He make the human beings high or 
low, wealthy or destitute, happy or miser- 
able, rich or poor, educated or ignorant, 
beautiful or ugly. For instance a man is 
travelling and while on his way a brick or 
a piece of stone or wood etc. falls down 
from a house upon his head in consequence 
of which his head is broken and he suffers 
great pain. Now you see that the house 
was not built by God, it was built by 
artisans and that the brick or stone or 
wood etc was not placed there by God, 
and God did not throw it or break his 
head. That brick or stone or wood was 
worn out by time. The brick etc being 
either worn out by time or movjed by any 
man or anitpal or wind broke his head and 
caused hirxi pain. But this was nqt caused 
by God. Consequently God h^s not crea- 
ted various kinds of pleasure and pain, 
highness and lowness in this world. On 
the other hand> by prawah (unbroken 
succession) this variegated universe conies 



( 161 ) 

into being and to end caused by the nimits 
such as the mutual action of time, swabhao 
(nature), niyati (rules of conduct), karma 
(action), purushdrth (any one of the four 
principal objects of human life i. e. dhar- 
ma, arih) kam, molcsha), matter ; and it 
would remain so from eternity to eternity. 
The moksa-pad is also without beginning 
and end. The living beings do attain 
that position having destroyed all the ac- 
tions. The worldly beings come into 
human or other life and enjoy pleasure or 
suffer pain and get high or low position 
etc. with the help of their respective causes 
nimits according to their good or bad 
actions. Arhat-Siddha Parmeshar-knows 
from his knowledge all the different condi- 
tions of the worldly beings who are doing 
good or bad actions and suffering their 
consequences with the help of nimits. 
Everything is done just in the same way 
as God reflects in his knowledge. Nothing 
is done contrary to it. 

88 Q. — What short-comings are there in all the 
religions ? 



( 162 ) 

A. — Nobody calls the religion believed in by 
him to be faulty. People are always ready 
to point out faults in other religions. The 
Jaina religion is entirely faultless. But 
in the present age the Indian Jainas do 
not possess such mental and physical ener- 
gies as may enable them to completely 
tread the path of moksha as dictated by 
the Jaina shastras. The Jainas pass the 
lives of a recluse and householder accor- 
ding to the present age. But they cannot 
completely follow the Utsargih (natural, 
that which is liable to be abolished in 
exceptional cases, though generally valid) 
path. The second defect among the 
Jainas is that they pay little heed towards 
education. There is no union among 
them. Even the Sddhus are not on good 
terms among themselves. These defects 
are in the individual Jainas of the present 
age, while the Jaina religion is faultless. 

89 Q. — What have Judaism, Christianity and 
other religions done for mankind ? 



A,— These religions have done limited good to 



( 163 ) 

mankind by preaching through their reli- 
gious books to mankind the worship of 
God, mercy, charity, truth, chastity, con- 
tentment, forgiveness, drjava (honesty), 
mdrdava (gentleness), vbiaya (respect, 
politeness), obligingness, kratajnatd (grate 
fulness) etc., which give a good name 
to such persons in this world and swarg 
(heaven,) kingdom etc. But the religions 
referred to above, have done great harm 
to mankind in as much as they have not 
told mankind the true attributes of Deva 
(God) guru (teacher) and dharma and have 
teachings to the contrary. The Jaina reli- 
gion shows for mankind ehant hit (whole- 
some good) and the true path of moksha 
and nothing perverted. Hence it has done 
all good without harm. 

90 Q. — How did the people come to understand 
the importance of the formula of repen- 
tance ? 

A..— First the repentance does away with the 
sin which has been done unknowingly. 
This is not the case with all sorts of sins. 



( 164 ) 

Some sinful acts become relax by repen- 
tance. The good of repentance lies only 
in this that he who repents for a sinful 
act does not do that act again. The reason 
why the conviction in the formula of 
repentance is essential is that the person 
who fears the consequences of sinful act, 
repents purely from his heart, then his 
heart becomes very soft, and the very 
pervasiveness of that purity and softness 
in the heart destroys all sins. The for- 
mula of repentance has been dictated by 
the omniscient God who is free from 18 
faults. God never speaks falsehood. Thus 
formerly in the time of sarvajna Parmesh- 
war, Gautama and other munis (saints) 
believed in the truth of the formula. In 
other words, their speeches made the 
people believe in it. This is the siddhdnt 
(doctrine). 

91. Q. — Is it necessary to have a fixed day to take 
rest for doing dharma ? 

A. — One should always remain engaged in 
doing dharma, of course one who does not 



( 165 ) 

get time to do dharma may fix particular 
days for doing dharma. For such a per- 
son it is necessary to have fixed days for 
doing dharma. One who is independent 
(or self controlled; must always do dharma. 
It is essenlial to fix a day for giving up 
sinful acts. No day is meant for pleasure, 
enjoyment, play etc. 

92 Q. — Who is believed to be an avatar by reli- 
gionists ? 

A* — With the exception of Jainism many other 
religions do believe that God being mukti 
rw/>-liberated from the shuffles of actions 
and bodiless,-can come in the world as an 
avat&r. The cause of coming as an avaidr 
arises when there is a fall in virtue and 
the s&dhus and other good men are in 
trouble. In order to remove these evils 
and to do good to others and to destroy 
evil souls, the enemies of dharma, God 
takes an avatar in every age. Such is 
the statement in Gita. The Buddhists 
say that when the propagator of their 
religion viz. bhagzc^n having attained the 



( 166 ) 

highest stage of moksha sees his follow- 
ers in trouble, in order to remove their 
troubles, he takes an avatar. The Chris- 
tians believe that for the good of the 
sinful descendants of man, God sent his 
Son Christ on the earth. 

The Jains believe that after attaining 
liberation nobody comes back in this 
world, in as much as the causes of posses- 
sing body are good and bad karmas. On 
the attainment of moksha all karmas 
are destroyed. For this reason the Jainas 
do not believe that a soul after attainment 
of moksha takes an avatar. 

It has been described above how the 
Jainas believe in arhats. 

The followers of Vedas, Smritis, and 
Purans believe Bramha, Vishnu and Ma- 
heshwar to be the avatdrs of God. Some 
of them believe in 24 avatdrs of God such 
as machh, sukar, kachhu, narsingh etc. The 
others believe Patanjali, Shankar Swami, 
Ramanuja and others to be the avatdrs 
of God. Wherever there is any renowned 



( 167 ) 

man, his followers in their books speak of 
him as the avatar of God. In India always 
after some time a new religion antagonistic 
to the other, comes into being through a 
person — so called avatar of God, It is not 
known why God is so kind to Indians in 
as much as He comes here so often as an 
avatar. But the allegation that after 
attainment of moksha God comes in this 
world as avatar, is against reason and 
logic because all the different religions 
believe God to be omnipotent When 
God is omnipotent, can He not do every 
thing He likes without occupying a body. 
If He could do every thing without 
occupying a body, what was the necessity 
for him to come in the womb of a woman. 
Why did He not make proper arrangement 
in the beginning so that there would not 
have been any mismanagement and He 
would not have stood in need of coming 
here as avafir to put things into proper 
order. 

Many religionists believe that God is 
all-pervading. But he who is all-pervading 



( 168 ) 

is akria (motionless) i.e. one who can not 
do anything regarding motion like dkdsh 
(sky). If God is all-pervading, all power- 
ful, merciful, well-wisher of all living 
beings and preacher of the true religion, 
where-in the religious Samajic disputes 
arise which create ill* f eellings in worldly 
and religious matters among the people 
and cause the death of lacs of people and 
become the cause of many other troubles 
and calamities etc. why does not then God 
who is in those sakahas and who is merci- 
ful, all- pervading and all-powerful say 
at once that this is true and this is false 
and that one particular thing be done and 
the other avoided and that such is his 
statement which shows the true path and 
the others not. When in order to remove 
the troubles of the worldly beings God 
by remaining in the womb of woman and 
then having been born saves them from 
their enemies, why can he not remove 
those troubles at once without adopting 
the above procedure. If he cannot adopt 
the latter procedure, He cannot be proved 
to be omnipotent. 



( 169 ) 

What is the cause of it that God comes 
as an avatar in one country and not in 
the other. Bramha, Vishnu and Mahesh 
came as avatars in India only. The Christ 
was born in the eastern country and not 
in any other country. God sent Mohamad 
also in Arab only. Can God not take the 
form of Brahma, Vishnu, Mahadeva, 
Christ, Mohamad etc. as avafars in all the 
different countries and send also all foolish 
and barbarous people to Moksha by prea- 
ching them. 

93 Q. — The 24 Tirthankaras among the Jainas 
were also born in Aryavarta. Hence the 
aforesaid defect is also present there ? 

A. — My dear sir, had the Tirthankaras adopted 
this position of their own will, the afore- 
said defect would have been said to be 
found in them. The Jains do not believe 
in it. Hence that defect cannot be impu- 
ted to them. 

94 Q. — According to Jainas what is the cause for 
becoming a Tirthankara ? 



( 170 ) 

A. — A living being who has done very good 
karma is born as a Tirthankara by reason 
of those good Jcarmas and not of his own 
accord. 

95 Q. — As the Tirthankar also is bound by the 

Jcarmas, He can do nothing without Jcarmas* 
Hence why should he be believed to be 
God? 

A. — No one in the world (except Jainas) be- 
lieves in such God as arhat who has been 
free from 18 defects and who possessed 
such qualities as infinite knowledge etc. 
real happiness etc. Consequently the arhat 
himself is Parmeshwar and none else. 
The people in general believe in God to 
be the Lord of the universe like sovereigns. 
But according to their own allegations no 
God as believed in by them has been 
proved to be free from 18 faults. On the 
other hand, according to their Shastras, 
God is partial, cruel, ignorant, passionate, 
proud, ill-tempered, unjust, wicked, in- 
competent and powerless. 

96 Q # — How can we believe that Arhat Parmesh war 



( 171 ) 

was free from 18 defects and that the 
avatar of God believed in by others had 
those faults ? 

A, — My dear Sir, leaving aside prejudice, read 
the lives of Arhats and other avatars etc. 
and see their images noticing their 
conduct, thoughts and appearance ; from 
this you would learn which of them was 
faulty and which faultless. 

97 Q. — The Jainas have written well about their 
Tirthankaras and have also made their 
images shdnt (contented), ddnt (mild) 
nirvikdri (without change of mind 
or purpose), aloof from woman, of desire- 
less forms. 

A.— This idea of yours is wrong in as much as 
none prevented the writers of your sacred 
books from writing the good qualifications 
of your avatars and none told them to 
write the bad qualifications of your avatars 
such as a certain avatar had intercourse 
with another's wife, another avatar 
wandered with one's (sister), another avatar 
wandered in the jungle on account of his 



( 172 ) 

separation from his wife, another avatar 
being naked danced before a Rishi who 
gave him a curse whereupon his male 
organ was broken into pieces, another 
avatar caused a battle to be fought and was 
himself engaged in it, another avatar 
caused falsehood to be spoken, another 
avatdr was tired of going, another avatar 
went to eat gular fruits and not finding 
the fruits on the trees gave it a curse to 
be dried up and it was dried up, another 
avatdr infused life in a dead body, at the 
time of his death had himself hanged, 
wished to remain alive but could not, 
died when the time of the death ar- 
rived, could not remain alive till now, 
that God created people of a certain com- 
munity when those people did not act up to 
His dictates, He repented and having be- 
come angry destroyed certain cities and 
gave so many Curses etc. Many such state- 
ments are found in their books. Had 
not those avatars possessed those qualifi- 
cations, the writers would have not made 
a mention of those improper things. The 
writers were not their enemies on account 



( 173 ) 

of which enmity they might have written 
improper things. If they wrote falsely 
their books are not to be accepted. Thus 
it has been fully proved that the avatars 
of the people were of such character as 
mentioned in their books. Bharatrahari 
praises Cupid for having made slaves of 
the highest gods when they are attacked 
by the amorous dances of pretty and 
charming women. 

Consequently the writers of the times 
of the 24 Tirthankaras wrote their lives 
just as they actually were. Thus the 
biographies and the images of the avatars 
fully prove their faults and faultlessness. 

98 Q.— What are the biographies and qualities of 
the Tirthankaras ? 

If you want to read the biographies of 
the twenty four Jaina Tirthankaras in the 
historical form, please read the Trishash- 
tishalaka-purush-charitrabyHemachandra 
Suri. I give you a brief account of the 
life of the blessed Lord Mahavira, the last 
Tirthankara. 



( 174 ) 

In the Videhdesh (ancient Mithila coun- 
try) in Ksatriya-Kunda-grama, there was a 
Raja named Siddhartha, in the Surya- 
Vansha or Jnatavansha. 

He had a queen Trishla, who gave birth 
to a child on Tuesday, Chaitra Sudi 13th 
at night in the 1st part o£ Uttra Phalguni 
Nakchhatra, 542 years before Vikram 
Samvat. (i.e. about 600 B.C.) The parents 
gave him the birth name of Vardhmana. 
When he attained maturity his parents 
married him with Yashodha, the daughter 
of Sidhartha's feudatory Samarvir. When 
he became 28 years of age, his parents 
died. After that he remained in the 
family for 2 years at the request of his 
elder brother i.e. he remained in the house 
till he was aged 30 years and had one 
daughter named Priayadarshana. After 
that he took initiation in the sadhu life, 
with the permission of his elder brother 
Nandivardhan. For one year he kept a 
piece of cloth placed on his shoulder by 
Indra ? Subsequently he went about 
without clothes for the whole lif e.| Al though 



( 175 ) 

troubles befell him, he did not swerve 
from his true vow. Thereupon the devtds 
(good spirits) named him Mahavira. Af- 
ter his initiation, he renounced to commit 
or make others commit injury to living 
beings, he gave up speaking falsehood, 
theft, sexual intercourse, etc. lie not 
only gave up all these sins himself but 
also prohibited others from doing them. 
He possessed threefold knowledge from 
his birth. Just at the time of initiation 
he obtained the 4th knowledge viz. 
manparyay. The blessed Mahavira Lord 
practised great austerities for 12 J years. 
It is fully described in Avashyak Sutra 
and Kalpa sutra etc. what different troub- 
les befell him for 12 J years and at what 
different places and how he calmly and 
quietly bore all of them. What by means 
of the practice of austerities for 12J 
years and full meditation of virtue he 
completely destroyed his four ghatiharmas 
(those which obstruct the good qualities 
of soul), then in the last pahdr (a period of 
three hours) on Vaisakh Sudi 10th he 
attained Kevaljnma (perfect knowledge) 



( 176 ) 

onthe bank of the Rijuvaluka river in the 
village o£ Jram-bhika. He having left 
the aforesaid place arrived at Madhya- 
P&p& Nagri. At that place there were 
eleven well-known Brahmans headed by 
Indrabhuti r Gautam r nll learned in four- 
teen sciences. He removed all the doubts 
entertained by them in accordance with the 
Veda Srutis and by logical reasons and made 
the above mentioned eleven personages 
and their 4400 students as his desciples by 
performing their diksha ceremony. Out 
of them those (eleven) i. e. Gautam and 
others were given the title of Gandhara. 
They compiled the teachings of the 
Bhagvant in the books such as Acharanga 
etc. He also gave diksha to Chandna the 
virgin daughter of king Dadhivahan of 
Champa who made 36000 desciples. 

After the attainment of pure knowledge 
{Keval jndna) he visited countries on the 

he 

eastern side. In the life time of Lord 
Mahavira there were not more than 14000 
sadhus, 46000 sadhwis, 159,000 srdvaks 
and 3,18000 srdvikds. The lectures of 



( 177 ) 

Lord Mahavira made several chiefs His 
votaries. They are as follows :— 

(I) Raja Srenika alias Bhambhasara, 
King of Rajagrihi. 

(II) Ashoka Chandra alias Kunik 
king of Champa, son of Bhambha 
sara. In the Buddhistic books 
he is named as Ajatshatru. 

(Ill) Raja Chetaka, king of Vaish&U 
nagri. 
(XXI) A group of 18 Rajas of Kashi and 
Kaushal. 

(XXII) Vijaya king ef Pulaspur. 

(XXIII) Sveta king of Amalkalpa Nagri. 

(XXIV) Raja Udayan of Vitbhai-patan in 
sindh. 

(XXV) Raja Udayan vatsa of Kaushambhi. 
(XXVI) Raja Nandi-Vardhan of Ksatriya 
kundagrani. 

(XXVII) Raja Chandra Pradyota of Ujjain. 

(XXVIII) Raja Stal of Prishta Champa. 

(XXIX) Raja Prasanha Chandra of Potan- 
pur. 



( 178 ) 

(XXX) Raja Aclin Sliatru o£ Hasti Shir- 
sha nagar. 

CD 

(XXXI) Raja Dhanavah of Rishabhpur. 
(XXXII) Raja Vir Krishnamitra o£ Virpur 



(XXXIII) Raja Vnsavdatta of Vijaipur. 

(XXXIV) Raja Pratihat of Saugandhik. 
(XXXV) Priya Chandra,king of Kanakpur. 

(XXXVI) Raja Bal of Matiapur. 

(XXXVII) Raja Arjan of Sughosh nngar. 

(XXXVIII) Raja Datta of Champft. 

(XXXIX) Raja Mitra Nahdi of Saketpur. 

(XL) Raja Dasharn Bhadra of Dasharn- 
pur, and many other Rajas were 

the followers of Lord Mahavira. The 
names of all these are found in the works 
known as Angas and Upangas. He 
lived 42 years after his initiation clikshd. 
Out of this period he passed first 12 
Chaturmasas (period of 4 months of the 
rainy season i.e. Shavan, Bhadrapad 
Ashwin and Kartiq) as chhadamast (pass- 
ing saint's life before kevalagnana) and 



( 179 ) 

the subsequent 30 Chaturmasas as Kevali 
as given below : — 

The first 12 rainy seasons 1. Asthi- 
grfima, 2. Rajagrihi, 3. Champa. 4. Prishta 
Champa, 5. Bhadrika nagri, 6. Bhadrika, 
7. Alambhiya, 8. Rajgrihi, 9. A nary a- 
desh, 10. Savathi, 11. Vishala, 12. Champa, 

As Kevali He passed 12 rainy seasons 
in Rajgrihi, 11 in Vishala, 6 in Mithila 
and 1 in Pavapuri. Out of 42 years, for 
30 years Lord Mahavira taught dharma 
to all the 4 classes and spread dharma. 
He had his last rainy season at Pavapuri 
in the sabha of the old office of the king 
Hstipala. He attained nirvana i.e. Mukti- 
pad, Siddhapad, Parmeshwdr-pdd (libera- 
tion) on Kartik vadi loth at night. 

According to the test just described the 
avatars believed in by other religionists, 
were not free from 18 faults. It was only 
Arhat who was free from 18 dushans 
f faults). The God believed in by other 
religionists is according to their own alle- 
gations proved to be ignorant, incompe« 



( 180 ) 

tent, having liking and disliking, merci- 
less, prejudiced, imprudent etc. Conse- 
quently there is no God besides Arhat 
and Siddha. This is the main doctrine 
of Jainas. 

The Siddha does not concern himself 
with the affairs of the world. The blessed 
Arhat teaches only Dharma. He does not 
do any worldly work except teaching 
dharma. This proves that Arhat and 
Siddha Bhagvan are free from 18 dushans 
(faults). 

It is an impossible task to describe the 
qualities of God, yet I attempt to write 
something about the qualities of Arhat 
pad. Arhat Bhagvan being desireless of 
any gain in exchange, gives right instruc- 
tions which are holy and noble and are like 
rafts to take across the ocean of the mun- 
dane existence, to the king and the poor, 
the Brahman and the chanclal i.e. nil classes 
of persons alike. He possesses 1. infinite 
knowledge 2. infinite vision 3. infinite 
character 4. infinite austerity, 5. infinite 



( 181 ) 

power, 6. infinite fine gifts, 7. forgiveness, 
8. greedlessness, 9- simplicity. 10. pride- 
lessness, 11. humility, 12. truth, 13. self 
control, 14. desirelessness, 15. chastity 9 
16. mercy, 17. doing good to others, 18. 
absence of attachment, 19. absence of 
disliking, SO, fearlessness, 21. absence of 
hatred, 22. absence of laughter, 23. absence 
of shock, 24. absence of pleasure, 25. 
absence of pain. 26. passionlessness, 27. 
absence of superstition, 28 absence of 
ignorance, 29. sleeplessness, 30. absence of 
indifference 31. absence of idea of friend- 
ship and enmity, 32. equal regard for gold 
and stone, 33. equal regard for woman 
and grass, 34. avoidance of flesh diet, 
35. avoidance of intoxicating drugs, 36. 
avoidance of eating uneatables, 37. fathom- 
less mercy, 38. bravery, 39. strength, 40. 
fortitude, 41. serenity, 42. absence of 
speaking ill of others, 43. absence of self- 
praise, 44. power to cause, through prea- 
ching-, the salvation of those who have 
ill feelings towards him and who disgrace 
him and speak ill of him, etc. etc. 



( 182 ) 

The qualities of Arhat and Siddha both 
togetherarel. Avyaya (immortal) 2. glori- 
ous 3. Achintya (beyond thought), 4. incal- 
culable, 5. Primeval, 6. Brahma, ( possessor 
of infinite happiness) 7. Ishwar (Lord of 
devas), 8. Anant (Infinite) 9. The des- 
troyer of cupid, 10, Lord of Yogis, 11. 
proficient in Yoga, 12. manifold, 13. 
One, 14, pure intelligence, 15. imma- 
culate. 

Each of these attributes is explained as 
follows : — 

1, Immortal is that which exists in all 
times-past, present and future. (2) Glori- 
ous because he shines as the Lord over all 
gods such as Indra and others. (3) 
Beyond thought because even mental 
contemplation is unable to grasp him. (4) 
Incalculable because his qualities can not 
be calculated as they are beyond all enu- 
meration. 5. Primeval or first because he 
leads the path to righteousness in the 
world. 6. Brahma because he is the seat 
of infinite happiness. 7. Ishwar because 



( 183 ) 

lie is the Lord of all Gods. 8. Infinite 
because he is endowed with infinite know- 
ledge and wisdom or because he has no 
end. 9. Destroyer of: Cupid because he 
destroys Cupid as the rising sun dispels 
darkness or (one who has not faculties 
liable to the influences of Cupid.) one who 
has not got any sort of body. 10. Yog- 
ishwer because he is the Lord of the 
Yogis possessing fourfold knowledge. 
11. Proficient in Yoga because he has 
grasped all the secrets of Yoga, or he has 
broken asunder all association with the 
karma. 12. Manifold because he is om- 
niscient and omnipresent through know- 
ledge. 13. One because he is secondless- 
ly best. 14. Pure intelligence because 
he lives and moves and have his being 
in pure knowledge. 15. Immaculate 
because he is free from 18 faults. 

These fifteen attributes are given to 
God by religionists who believe in Him. 

The following are some of the innumer- 
able attributes of a Siddha. 



( 184 ) 

He is beyond 1. destruction, 2. oldage, 
3. death, 4. change or motion, 5, consump- 
tion, 6. impurity, 7. mutibilily, 8. form ; 
He is the 9. form of refulgence, 10. the 
Lord, 11. the supreme being, 12. the 
highest spirit, 13. the form of existence 
intelligence and bliss, 14. the unborn, 15. 
the one not to be born a^ain. 

99. Q. — What are the mutual relations of faiths 
or D harm a ? 

A, — Dharma is related to the soul as subject 
and attribute and truth is the connecting 
link of nil the religions in the world and 
it is truth which is loved. 

100 Q, — In what way is the Dharma connected 
with physical science, arts and literature ? 

A. — Dharma is related to the physical science 
as knowledge and knowable, to arts which 
are not above suspicions, as some thing to 
be avoided and to arts which are innocent, 
as acceptable, to literature which promotes 
spiritual knowledge and vision. 



( 1S5 ) 

101 Q.~In what way can religious looks, natural 
science, political economy and sociology 
help the Dharma sha-stra ? 

A. — By religious books I mean the sacred 
books of every religion. The truth in 
every sacred book is helpful to the pro- 
gress of righteousness and the untruth 
therein is a sort of set back to it. The 
books on physical science disclose many of 
the infinite forces which are mentioned in 
the religious books to be working by 
combination of matter and force. Conse- 
quently the books on physical science help 
in supporting the truth contained in the 
sacred love. By Jivan shastra, I mean po- 
litical economy. If money is earned by 
honest means, jivan shastra is helpful in 
furthering the object of dharma shastra. 
If money is earned by dishonest means, 
it would c:tiise sin and it goes against 
dharma shastra. The Vaidik shastra is 
helpful in spreading dharma shastra by 
removing diseases. By sarnajik shastra I 
mean ntii shastra As niti shastra makes 



( 186 ) 

man do work lawfully in the world it 
promotes the injunctions of the dharma 
shastra. Consequently hid shastra is also 
helpful to the dharma shastra. 



102 Q. — In what manner can religious books help 
the other scientific books ? What is the 
connection between dharma and music ? 

A. — The dharma shastra helps the shastras of 
other sciences only to a small extent and 
not entirely. The dharma shastra is help- 
ful to all that is written in the shastra of 
other sciences according as it supports or 
is antagonistic to them. The praise of 
Parmeshwar, teacher and dharma or the 
attributes of dharma and the virtues of a 
dharmic person in verse, song or music 
causes the belief of a hearer to be firm in 
dharma and stores good karmas for him 
and causes the destruction of karmas and 
puny a bandha to the singer. One who 
sinjjs a som; exciting delusion or lust would 
have the bondage of sin and would be 
degenerated in the next life. 



( 187 ) 

103 Q. — How far is dharma effective in perfectly 

purifying human being ? 

A. — Dharma has a very great effect in this 
respect in as much as it is dharma which 
can make a human being attain Ishvar- 
pad. No stage is higher or purer than 
this. 

104 Q. — How can one who has gone astray from 

the dharma be purified ? 

A. — The blessed Arhat, who is free from 18 
defacts, in order to purify the fallen per- 
sons has explained theshastras, as, Sracldha 
jit-Kalpa, Yatijit-kapla, Nishith, Kalpa, 
Vayavh^ra. The aforesaid books describe 
10 kinds of prdyashchitta (penances) for 
purifying fallen persons. The nature of 
purification takes with the nature of trans- 
gression in each particular case. The 
purificartory rites prescribed for a house- 
holder are different from those for the 
sadhus. One who takes the prescribed 
penance and then acts upon it, becomes 
purified like a clothing from which a blot 
is removed. 



( 188 ) 

105. Q. — Many people make sacrifices to Par- 

mesh var in order to attain liberation 
moksha. Is it essential or not ? 

A. — Those who make sacrifices to Parmeshvara 
by killing living beings, are greatly mis- 
taken because Parmeshvara is without 
passion, most merciful, always desireless. 
No work whatever pleases or displeases 
him. Thus to kill living beings and make 
sacrifices for him is a great sin. This 
practice has been brought into existence 
by most ignorant persons. This would 
appear from the Jainamata-vriksa com- 
piled by me, 

106. Q. — What bearing has dharma on the pro- 

gress or the country ? 

A. — The country is a progressive one in 
which on account of the spread of 
dharma such good actions are done as to 
follow the rules of law, to have union 
among themselves, to do good to others, 
to be kind to all living beings, to speak 
truth, not to cheat or defraud, to acquire 



( 189 ) 

knowledge always, to lead a contented 
life, to avoid committing theft, adultery, 
taking abhaksha, drinking prohibited 
things, practising superstitious rites. The 
progress of a country is impossible with* 
out dharma. 

107, Q, — How should the king and the customs 

be followed ? 

A. — If the King gives legal orders they ought 
to be followed and the useful customs 
put in vogue by good persons must 
certainly be followed. The customs 
the non-observance of which is liable to 
cause material and spiritual loss to us by 
the country city or communit}*, ought to 
be followed. 

108. Q. — What are the perfect attributes of 

dharma found among the different re- 
ligions ? What are the eventual objects 
of dharma. 

A. — The perfect attributes of dharma are three 
in number viz. (1) Darshana (belief), (2) 



( 190 ) 

jndna ^knowledge), (3) chdritra faction) 
Darshana means belief in tatvas* The 
Tatvas are three viz. deva, guru, dharma. 
By the term deva is meant master. Mas- 
ter is one who is free from 18 dusham 
(defects), is possessed of 12 gunas (vir- 
tues), and is the preacher of true dharma 
in this world and is after giving up this 
body to become the Siddha. There is no 
God other than such God. To worship 
such a benevolent master for the purpose 
of purifying one's own soul, to publish 
His qualities in the world according to 
his ability to praise Him always are acts 
helpful to one's spiritual development. 
This is called Shudha devatatva. Guru 
(teacher) is one who observes 5 maha-vratas 
(highest vows), who is well-versed in sac- 
red lore, has always uniformity of disposi- 
tion, gets pure food i.e. free from any 
fault by means of begging, maintains 
thereby his body for the purpose of doing 
good, possesses many other such qualities 
and tells the people in the world what 
has been preached by the aforesaid 



( 191 ) 

masters. This is Gurutatva. The afore- 
said masters have shown to the people 
the path (Law) which leads to salva- 
tion. This is dharma tatva What is 
contrary to those three is called (1; 
Kudeva (false Master, (2) ku-guru (false 
teacher) (3) Ku-dharuia (false law.) One 
ought to believe in the truth of master, 
teacher, and law and wholly abandon 
Icadevcii Ku-guru^ ku'dharma- Thus one 
attains the first part (attribute^ of.dharma 
named Darshan. There are five divisions 
of Jnana (knowledge) «.£., (1) mati-Jnana 
(knowledge through senses, (2) Sruti- 
jnana (knowledge by means of education) 
(3) avadhi- jnana (knowledge of jorming 
matter to a certain extent) (4) man-pray- 
ay jnana (knowledge of the mental 
thought of living beings born of pregnancy 
in 2j doipas, {o) Keval jnana (per- 
fect knowledge). The objects of these 5 
kinds of knowledge are six dravyas and 
nine tattvas. This is 2nd part of dharma 

named jnana. The third part of dharma 
is cluiritra. It is divided into 140 parts 



( 192 ) 

by reason of the divisions of charana 
satiari and karana-saitari. The divisions 
oi char ana saltari are (1) five Mahavratas 
(2) ten Yati dharma (3) seventeen sanyam 
(self-control) (4) ten vaiya-vrityas (ser- 
vices) (5) nine brahmacharya (jupti, 

(6) three jn&na, darshan and ch&ritra, 

(7) twelve tapas (8) control of icrodh 
(anger) etc. These are 70 In number. 
The 70 divisions of karana saltan "are :— 

(1) 4 kinds of bodily purification. 

(2) 5 kinds of sammiti 

\o) 12 kinds of meditations 

(4) 12 kinds olpraiimds 

(5) 5 kinds of control of senses 

(6) 25 Pratilekhna 

(7) 3 Guptis 

(8) 4 kinds of Abhigrhaha 

Thus there are 140 divisions of charit- 
ra in all. This is third part of dharma. 



( 193 ) 

An Explanatory list of words, phrases 

sentences &c. in the hook. 
Page. 

101 Abstinence from uneatable things [Abhak- 
sliya-tydga] 

155 Achalabhrata. 9th Ganadhar of Lord 
Mahavir. 
87 Action [Karma]. Translated also as Func- 
tion on p. 17. 4th Cause in the pro- 
duction of the effect. 

93 Actions that obscure knowledge \Gnana- 
varniya] 

Actions that obscure cognition [Darsnd- 
varniya] 

Actions that create feelings of pain or plea- 
sure. [Vedaniya] 

Actions that bring on Delusion [Mohniya 
Karma] 

Actions that determine period of life [Ayu 
Karma] 

Actions that determine the individuality 
[Nam Karma] 

Actions that determine surroundings viz. 
family, race etc [Gotra Karma] 



( 194 ) 

93 Actions that interfere with the performance 
or enjoyment of good things [Antardya 
Karma] 

98 Actions that impede Soul's progress [Ghati 
Karmds], The four karmas viz. Gnana- 
varniya, Darsnavarniya, Mohniya, and 
Antarfiya are called Ghati Karmas, 

40 Advaitism. Vedantic doctrine propounded 
by Shri Shanker-Acharya. 

148 Afflictions [Parisahds] These are 22. For 
further details, see Uttaradyayana, 
2nd chapter. 

155 Agnibhuti. 1st Ganadhar of Lord Mahavir. 

155 Akampita. 8th Ganadhar of Lord Mahavir. 
92 Anger. [Krodha\. There are 18 Papas- 
thdns : this is 6th. 

153 Another purpose [Apavdda]. Special rule. 
87 Apparent forms [Pan/aya]. 

132 Apdn. One kind of winds moving in a 
body, 

110 Arhat. One free from 18 doshas — 18 faults. 
These 18 faults are enumerated at 
p. 110-13. He is also called Arihant, 
one who has destroyed inner enemies i.e. 
Baga— ^passion, and Dvesha — hatred. 



( 195 ) 

154 Aristnemi. 22nd Tirthanker of the Jains. 
98 Avadhi. Knowledge independent of senses, 
comprising limited objects. 

123 Atom. [Parmami] 

150 Baldev — Elder brother of Yasudeva, who is 
the king of 3 continents. 

Bahushruta — One learned in many shastras. 
Belief in Tatvas —[Darshan]. 
Bhutas— Five material elements — Earth, 
Water, Fire, Wind and Sky. 
1 6 Brahma — One of the Puranic Gods believed 
to be the creator of the world by the 
Hindus. 
16 Buddhists — Followers of Lord Buddha. 
92 Calumny. [Abhyakhyan']. 13th Papasthan. 
40 Canon of Real existence of phenomena 

[Satakhyati\. 
.76 Chandna. Virgin daughter of king Dadhi- 
vahan. She was the first among Shravi- 
kas to be initiated in Jain Diksha by 
Lord Mahavir. She is known as Chand- 
nabala. 
.50 Chakravarti. King of 6 continents : Bharat 
was the 1st Chakravarti in the begin* 
ning of this cycle. 



( 196 ) 

120 Charvakas — Followers of an ancient school 

of Indian philosophy, who do not believe 
in soul. 

143 Chailyavanda~Bow to idols repeating God's 
virtues. 

127 Characteristics [Lingo] (Reasons). 

145 Characteristics of Dhanna. These are ten 
and are given at p. 145. 

192 Gharansattari. 

178 Chhadrnasta. Passing saint's life before 
Kevalgnana. 

152 Chhed shudha shastra. 

87 Continuity. [Niyati] (Futurity). Also 
translated as Law of Continuity. There 
are five causes in production of any 
effect. This is 3rd. 

136 Concomitant cause [Sahakari Karan"]. 

121 Consciousness [Svasamvedand]. 

57 Contradictory [Virudha Hetvabhasaj. 

92 Covetousness [Lobhi"] 9th Papasthan. 
109 Delusion [Mithydfva]. 

92 ' Desire [Vasnd J, 
190 Deva Tatva. 



( 197 ) 

190 Dharma Tatva. 

98 Dharma Tirtha — Teaching of twelve An- 
gas, the sacred books ; as well as the 
establishment of the fourfold Sangha. 
112 Disgust— [Jugupsd]. 

146 Duty of a householder [Grihasta Dharma]. 
140 Eight-fold devotion. [Asia Prakari Puja\. 
Its description begins from p. 141. 
84 Energy [Udyami~] oth Cause in an effect, 
also translated as 'motive power'. 

19 Eternal truths [Arya Satyas]. Buddha's 
doctrine. These are four viz. Dukkha, 
Samuchya, Mdrga, and Nirodha. 

92 Extortion. [ParigraK] 8th Papasthan. 

92 False utterances [Mayamrishdvada] 17th 
Papasthan. 

92 Falsehood [MrisKdvdda] 2nd Papasthan. 

26 Fallacj 7 of mutual dependence [Itaratardsd- 
yadoshd]. 

40 Fallacy of perverse knowledge [Viprita 
khyatf\. 

24 Fallacy of reasoning in a circle [Anavastte 
dosha] . 



( 198 ) 

92 Future action (Prdrabdha Karma.) 
143 Going on pilgrimage. \_Tirtha yatra]. 

150 Great vows [Mahdvratas']. These are five 

and observed by Sadhus. 
190 Gurutatva. 

92 Hatred [ Dvesha] 11th Papasthan. 

92 Illusion [Maya] (Deceipt). 8th Papasthan. 

101 Infinite pure knowledge [Anant keval 
gnana\ 

„ Infinite pure vision [Anant keval Darsan]. 

„ Infinite fivefold possessions [Anant Pancha 
Lahdhis]. 

■ „ Infinite power of: action [Anant Charitra]. 
155 Indrabhuti — 1st Ganadhar of Mahavir. 
92 Injury to living beings [Jiva.hima\ 1st 
Papasthan. 

150 Inner enemies [Antara Vairies]. These 
are six. 

185 Innocent [Nirvadya]. 

18 Jaimini's Doctrine—Doctrine propounded 
by the Sage Jaimini. It is known as 
the Purva Mimansa Darsan. 

92 Jealousy [Paishunaya\ 14th Papasthan 



( 199 ) 

152 Kash Shudha Shasira. 
192 Karan sittari. 
92 Like or dislike sentiments [Rati, arati] 

loth Papasthan. 
98 Liberation [Moksha], Jains believe in nine 
Tatvas. This is the 9th Tatva. 

98 Lohdntiha — Celestial beings, whose duty is 
to come to the would-be Tirthanker and 
say 'Oh Bhagwan, show the path o£ 
virtue and rectitude'. 

16 Madhuhari Bhikshd. Particular kind of 
begging : just as a bee tastes the flowers 
without passion, so do the S&dhus beg. 

155 Mahavir Swami, 24th Tirthanker of. the 

Jains. 
175 Manaparydy. Knowledge of the thoughts 

of: those living in 2J dvipas. 

155 Manditputra. 6th Ganadhar of Lord 
Mahavir. 

57 Many-sided. [AneMntic dosha]. 

47 Material cause [Updddnfcdran]. 

98 Mati — Knowledge obtained by means of 
five senses and inind. 

155 Metarya— 10th Ganadhar of Lord Mahavir. 



( 200 ) 

16 Mimansakas — Followers of the Mimansa 

school of philosophy, known as 
Jaiminiya Darsan. This school is 
known as Purva Mimans&. 
99 Mulgums — Five great vows — non killing, 
truth, non-stealing, chastity and extor- 
tion observed by the sadhus. 

155 Muaryaputra. 7th Ganadhar of Lord 
Mahavir. 

17 Nature [Svabh&vd]. One of the causes in 

the production of the effect. 

92 Nature [Pralcrati~]. Special term used by the 
Sankyas for matter, as opposed to soul. 

16 Naiyayikas — Followers of an ancient school 
of Hindu philosophy propounded by 
the sage Akshapad. (Gautama). 

110 Obstruction to unstinted distribution of 

charity \Danantardydb\. 
Obstruction to unstinted possession [Labtid- 

ntardya]. 
Obstruction to unstinted powers [Virydn- 

tardya]. 

111 Obstruction to unstinted new enjoyments, 

such as flowers, garlands etc \Bhogan- 
iardyd\. 



33 



5* 



( 201 ) 

111 Obstruction to unstinted daily enjoyments 
such as woman 3 apparellsetc [Upbhogdn- 
tar&ya]. 

152 One purpose \_Utsargd\. general rule. 

147 Panch-Parmesti — A collective name for the 
five adepts viz — the Arhat, the Siddha, 
the Acharyas, the Upadyayas, the 
Sadhus. 

104 Patanjalists — Followers of Yoga Darsan — 
an ancient Hindu School of philosophy 
propounded by the sage Patanjli. 
92 Passion. [Rdga] 10th Papasthan. 
92 Past action [Sanchita]. 
187 Penances [Prayachhita]. 
175 Period of three hours [Pahar]. 
147 Posliad Yrata. 

155 Prabh^s. J 1th Ganadhar o£ Lord Mahavir. 
155 Prabhaswami. Pupil of Jambuswa/ni — last 

Kewali. 
100 Pravchana — Name generally used for the 
Jain Agamas. 
92 Present action (Kriyamtin). 
174 Priyadarsna — Daughter of Mahavir. 



( 202 ) 

92 Pride [ J/aw] 7th Papasthana. 
132 Fran — Breath. 

60 Quality of pervasion (Vydjjti). Invariable 
association of: Sad ja and Linga. 

92 Quarrel [KalaK] 12th Papasthan. 
166 Ramanuj — He is a propounder of the Vis- 
histadvait school of philosophy. His 
chief work is a commentary on Veclant 
Sutras. 

143 Rathydtra. Taking the image of God in a 

chariot along with a procession. 
100 Reverence to Scriptures. [Sruta Bhakti]. 
99 Right-seeing \_Darsan, Samyaklioa]. 

18 S&nkya doctrine— Teaching of sage Kapila. 
It forms one of the ancient schools of 
Hindu philosophy. The followers of 
this doctrine are called S&nkyas. 

92 Scandal. \_Paraparivada] loth Papasthan. 

98 Self-enlightened \Kevali\ one who destroys 

four kinds of Ghati karmas and obtains 
infinite knowledge etc. 

99 Self-control [Samvega], 

92 Sentimental grievance \Mithyatwa Salya] 
18th Papasthan. 



( 203 ) 

92 Sexual intercourse [Maithuri] 4 th Papas- 
than. 

16 Shiva. One of the Puranic Gods believed 

by the Hindus. The followers of this 
God are called Shaivites. 

47 Shanker-Acharya — He is a propounder o£ 
the Advait Vedant. His chief work is 
a commentary on Vedant Sutras. 

174 Siddhartha — Father of Lord Mahavir. 

18 Siddhi. 

126 Size \_Samsthana\. 

98 Sruta — Knowledge obtained from the Aga- 
mas, through their interpretation. 
155 Svayambhav. Author of Dasvaikalik-sutra 
and the pupil of Prabhavsvami. 

92 Subtle body of desire \Kd/man Sarira]. 
Body made of karmas : it accompanies 
the ^oul from all eternity. 
155 Sudharma. 6th Ganadhara of Lord Mahavir. 

153 Tapshudhi Shastra. 

19 Teaching \Tirtha\. 

92 Theft [Adattddan] 3rd Papasthan. 

17 Time. [K&l] one of the five causes of effect. 

18 Tirthanker. 



( 204 ) 

174 Trial*— Mother of Lord Mahavir. 

98 Twenty-virtues [Visha- sthdnlcas]. The 

description of these begins from p. 99. 

148 Troubles (Parisah&s). They are 16 in 
number, for further details see Uttara- 
dhyayan 2nd chapter. 

47 Upnishads — Original works forming the 
last part of the Vedas and treating of At- 
ma and Paramatma. 

162 Utsargic. 

99 Ultargunds — Purification of food etc. These 

are observed by the Sadhus. These are 
in connection with Mulgunas. 

Uttarmimansa — doctrine propounded by 
sage Vyasa. It forms one of the ancient 
Schools of Hindu philosophy. The 
followers of this school are called Ved- 
antis. 

19 Yaisesik doctrine — doctrine propounded by 
Sage Kanada. It is called by 'Vaisesik' 
because the sage believed 'Visesa' as one 
of the Categories. This also forms an 
ancient Hindu School of philosophy. 



( 205 ) 

150 Vasudeva — King of 3 continents. 

155 Vayubhuti — 3rd Ganadhar of Lord Mahavir. 

16 Vishnu — One of the Puranic Gods believed 
by the Hindus. The followers of this 
God are called Vaishnavas. 

99 Vows of service [Vaiydvriia]. 

155 Vyakta. 4th Ganadhar of Lord Mahavir. 

145 Worship [Upasna]. 

97 Wordly pleasures which necessarily show 
their effect on soul [Nikdchit Punya\. 

174 Yashodha — daughter of king Samarvir and 
wife of Mahavir. 




( 206 ) 

Brief notes on tlie works alluded 
to in tlie book. 
Page. 

176 Acharanga. 1st Anga sutra ; Shri Bhadra- 
bahuswami has composed a Niryukti 
upon it. The Niryukti with the Sutra 
is commented by Shri Shilangacharya. 
Translated in the Sacred Books of the 
East Series Vol. XXII. Published with 
the commentary by Agamodayasmiti, 
Surat. 

95 Anekantjaypataka. The author is Shri 

Hari-bhadrasuri : the same is the com- 
mentator. It deals with Syadvad. Pub- 
lished by seth Mansukhbhai Bhagubhai, 
Ahmedabad. 

96 Aptamimansa. The author is Shri Samant- 

bhadra-acharya : commentator is Shri 
Vidyanandsuri : commentary is known 
as Astasahsri (To be had at Hindi 
Grantha Ratnaker Karyalaya, Bombay). 
The commentary is further commented 
by Shri Yashovijayji. 

100 Avasyakasutra. 1st Mula Sutra, dealing 
with higher principles of Jain philo- 



( 207 ) 

sophy, and history. Shri Bhadrabahu- 
swami has composed a Niryukti upon 
it. The Niryukti has been commented 
by Shri Haribhadrasuri. Published by 
Agamodayasamiti, Surat. There are 
also another commentaries on it by 
many Acharyas. 

119 Bhagavati — 5th Anga Sutra, commented 
by Shri Abhaydevasuri. It deals with 
36000 questions and answers between 
Gotama and Mahavir. Published in Babu 
Dhanpatsinghji Series, Calcutta. 

154 Dasvaikalika Sutra. 2nd Mula Sutra. 
Composed by Shri Svayambhavswami 
and commented by Shri Haribhadrasuri. 
It deals with rules of conduct for asce- 
tics. Published by Bhimsi Manek 
Bombay. 

96 Dharmasanghrani. The author is Shri 
Haribhadrasuri. The work is in Pra- 
krit verses. The commentator is Shri 
Malaygiriji. It deals with all systems 
of philosophy. Published by Devchand 
Lalbhai Jain Pustakodhar Fund, Surat. 



( 208 ) 

95 Dwadasharnayachakra. Great work on 
Syadwada by Shri Mallavadin. It is 
commented by Shri Yashovijayji. 

100 Gnatadharmakatha. 6th Anga Sutra. It 
has been commented by Shri Abaydeva 
sari. It deals with the lives of reli^i- 
ous personages. Published in Babu 
Dhanpatsingji series, Calcutta. 

100 Kalpa-Sutra. It deals with the lives of 
Mahavir, Parsvanath, Aristnemi, and 
Risobhnath. Translated in the Sacred 
Books of the East series vol. XXII. 
The author is shri Bhadrabahuswami : 
there are many commentaries : The 
prevailing one is that of Shri Vinay- 
vijayji, known as Sukhbodhika. 

187 Kalpa. One of the chhed Sutras. There 
isaNiryukii on it by shri Bhadrabahus- 
wami. It deals with special rules for 
Sadhus. There is also a Bhasya on it 
by Shri Sanghadasgani Mahattara : 
Commentator is Shri iishemakirti. 

94 Karma-Granthas. It is a work on Karma* 
philosophy of the Jains. Six different 



( 209 ) 

works viz. Karma- vipak, Karma- Stava, 
Bandha-swamitwa, Shadshiti, Satak, 
Saptatika, — come under this heading. 
Shri Shivsharma Suri is the author of 
old Satak and Shri Chandra Mahattara- 
charya of: Saptatika. Shri Malladhari 
Hemchandrasuri and Shri Malaygiriji 
are the commentators on old Satak and 
Saptatika respectively. There are also 
old Karma Granthas and new ones. 
Authors of the old ones are different, 
and of the new five is Shri Devendra- 
Surij and the same is the commentator 
on them. Four of the old ones are pub- 
lished by Shri Atmanand Jain Sabha 
(Bhaonagar), and five new ones with 
Saptatika by Shri Jain Dharma Pra- 
sarak Sabha (Bhaonagar). Old Satak 
is not yet published. 
94 Karma-Prakriti — It deals with higher prin- 
ciples of Karma philosophy. Shri Shiv- 
sharma Suri is the author. He has extrac- 
ted it from Agrayaniya Purva of Dristi- 
vada Anga. There are two commen- 
taries-one by Shri Malaygiriji and the 
other by Shri Yashovi jay ji. Both of them 



( 210 ) 

are published — one by Devchand Lal- 
bhai Jain Pustakodhar Fund, Surat, and 
the other by Shri Jain Dharma Prasarak 
sabha, Bhaonagar. 

96 Nandisutra. — 2nd Chulika Sutra : Author 
is Shri Devavachakgani : and the 
commentator is Shri Malaygiriji. There 
is also a commentary on it by Shri 
Haribhadrasuri. The commentary of 
shri Malaygiriji with the text is pub- 
lished by Agamodaya Samiti, Surat. 
Shri Malaygiriji writes that his com- 
. mentary is based on an old one by 
Shri Haribhadrasuri. 

154 Niryavalik — one o£ the Upangas. 

187 Nishith — One of the chheda Sutras. 

96 Nayayavatar— -A work on logic by shri Sid- 
dhasena Divaker : It is commented by 
Shri Siddharshigani, Published by 
Shri Hemchandacliarya Jain Sabha, 
Patau. Translated also into English by. 
Dr. Satischandra Yidyabhusan Ph.D. 
Calcutta. 



( 211 ) 

94 Panchasangraha — Standard work on Karma 
philosophy by Shri Chandra Mahattara- 
charya and commented by Shri Malay- 
giriji. Published by Iliralal Hans- 
raja, Jamnag&r, 

96 Praman-Mimansa — Work on logic and 
philosophy in Sutra-style by Shri Hem- 
chandrasuri. Commentary also has been 
written by him. Some portion is obtain- 
able now : this is published by Sheth 
Mansukhbhai Bhagubhai, Ahmedabad. 

96 Premeya-Kamal-Martand — commentary on 
Pariksha-Mukh Sutras of shri Manikya- 
nandi, by shri Prabhachandra-suri. To 
be had at Hindi Grantha Karyelaya, 
Bombay. 

96 Praman-Samucchaya — a logical compen- 
dium of a Buddhist Acharya Dignag. 
Shri Haribhadrasuri has commented 
on it. 

96 Pragnapana — 4th Upanga. The author is 
Arya Syamacharya. It is commented 
by shri Malaygiriji. Published by Aga- 
modaya Samiti, Surat. Shri Malaygiri 
notes that his commentary is based on 
an old one by Shri Haribhadra Suri. 



( 212 ) 

95 Sammatitarka— Work by Shri Siddhasena 

Divaker in Prakrit. It is a standard 
work on Jain philosophy. It is com 
mented by Rajgacchiya Abhayadevsuru 
One part is published in Shri Yashovi- 
jaygi Grantha mala Bhavanagar. 

94 Satak — Known as the 5th Karma Grantha. 
The author is shri Shivasarma Suri and 
commentator Shri Malyagiriji. 

96 Sh&straVartaSamucchya — The author is 

Shri Haribhadra Suri. It deals with 
all systems of philosophy. He himself 
has commented it. Another commentary 
known as Syadyadkalpalata is written 
by shri Yashovijayji. Published by 
shri Devchand Lalbhai Jain Pustak- 
odhar Fund, Surat. 

96 Shad-darsan-Samucchaya — Dealing with 
six systems of philosophy viz-Buddha, 
Nyaya, Sankya, Jaina, Mim&nsa, and 
Charvaka, The author is shri Hari- 
bhadrasuri ; commentator is shri Guna- 
ratnasuri. Published in Bibliothica 
Indica Series Calcutta. 



( 213 ) 

96 Sutra-kritanga-2nd Anga sutra. Shri Bhadra 
bahuswami has written a Niryukti on 
it. This Niryukti with the sutra is 
commented by shri Shilangacharya. 
Published by Agamodaya Samiti, surat. 
Translated in the Sacred Books of the 
East series vol. XLV. 

96 Syadvad-Manjari. It is a commentary by 
Mallisenasuri on Anya-yoga-Vyavach- 
hedikaof shri Hemchandrasuri. Publish- 
ed in shri Yashovijaya-Grantha-Mala, 
Series Bhaonagar. 

95 Syadvad-Ratnaker — A great work of Shri' 

Vadidevasuri, a contemporary of Shri 
Hemchandracharya. It is a commen- 
tary on Praman-naya-tatwa-lokalankar, 
Sutras by him. Some portion of this 
great work is published by Sheth 
Mansukhbhai Bhagubhai, Ahmedabad. 

96 Syadvad-rantavtarika— Commentary on 

Pramana-naya-tatwa lokalankar, by shri 
Ratnaprabhasuri. It is only a beginning 
to enter into a great work-Syadvadrat- 
naker. Published by shri Yashovijayaji 
Granth-Mala Series Bhaonagar. 



( 214 ) 

96 Tattvartha— Work in Sutra Style. The 
Acharjas of the Swetamber and Di- 
gamber sects have written many com- 
mentaries on this work. The author 
is shri Umaswati. There is also a 
Bhasya by the author himself. The 
principal commentators are Shri Sid- 
dhasengani, Shri Pujyapad-swami and 

Shri Akalankdeva. 
173 Trishasti-salaka-purusha-charita-Historical 

work dealing with lives of 63 persona- 
ges, written by shri Hemchandracharya. 
Published by shri Jain Dharma prasarak- 

sabha, Bhaonagar. 
119 Visheshavasyaka-bhasya — It is a large 

commentary in Prakrit by shri Jin- 
bhad rngani Kshamashraman, on the 
Niryukti of the Samayik adyaya of the 
Avasyaka Sutra, This Prakrit com- 
mentary is further commented by Mai- 
ladhari Hemchandrasuri. It is also 
known as Sabdambhonidhi-Mahabhasya. 
Published in shri Yashovijayiji-Gran- 

thamala Series — Bhaonagar. 
103 Yoniprabhrit— Author is Dharsena : it 

treats of different sciences. 







ERRATA. 


p. 


L. 


Incorrect. 


Correct. 


11 


18 


Perfom 


Perform 


13 


10 


Chundra 


Chandra 


18 


22 


donot 


do not 


20 


12 


are; God 


are God. 


31 


7 


Second 


second 


32 


9 


discreet 


discreet 


33 


3 


body excellent, 
form 


body, excellent 
form 


37 


17 


actions therefore 


actions ; therefore 


38 


4 


ad-infinitnm 


ad-infirutum 


38 


15 


unreal. Nothing 


unreal, nothing 


40 


3 


advaitism 


Advaitism. 


42 
44 


15 

8 


Prapanchor 
madman 


Prapanch 
m ad man 


49 


4 


ever lasting 


ever-lasting; 


50 


14 


pr fix 


prefix 


51 




sky flowers 


sky-flowers. 


53 


11 


rope 


rope (see note on 
page 54. 


56 


6 


kinds of 


kinds o£ eternal 
substances. 


5G 


12 


etc:: 


eternal. 


59 


5 


God. 


God 



P. L. 


Incorrect. 


Correct. 


60 22 


Grass 


grass 


60 25 


ofGod 


of God 


62 18 


nuinference 


an inference. 


63 4 


God- just 


God just 


64 5 


* Form 


From 


64 13 


up on 


upon 


66 7 


towardse vil 


towards evil 


67 11 


theyper form 


they perform 


69 11 


theif 


thief 


76 7 


positionis 


position is 


76 12 


all-intelligent. 


all-intelligent 




Being 


Being 


78 9 


swaim 


swarm 


82 4 


Mahadeo 


" Mahadeo 


82 7 


all 


all" 


84 4 


prov 


prove 


86 13 


man 


men 


88 14 


water 


(3) water 


89 16 


ambryo 


embryo 


92 6 


dislike, senti- 
ments 


dislike sentiments 


94 9 


de versions 


divisions 


95 21 


DwMashas&r 


Dwadashar 


95 22 


ZJZZWK 


srasirc 


96 2 


srgsre 


*rg^w 


96 11 


rarccfr 


«ran% 



P. L. 

96 16 

ji ?> 
„ 22 
„ 25 

103 9 

104 7 
„ 8 

106 5 
111 15 
111 16 
114 4 

* 18 
22 

117 17 

123 17-18 

viz I see, 
125 15 
136 11 

138 21 

144 1 

n I 5 

145 10 

152 11 

153 21 



Incorrect. 

Pramey 

streng 
Concommittant 

inter 

self-existence 

extra ordinary 

bind. 

well polished 

devine 

immemorabta 

have 
estinguished 

a single form* 

and I do. 
existance 
Concommitant 

couse 
Christian 
Dharma 
can not 
Dharmi 
red hot 

(Shudhi- 

sh&stra). 



Correct. 

Praman 

vmm 
**\ 

strength 
concomitant 
inner 

self -existent 
extraordinary 
bind him. 
well-polished 
divine 
immemorial 
have been estinguish- 
ed. 

a singie form viz I see 
and I do. 

existence 
Concomitant 

cause 

Christians 

Dharmi 

cannot 

Dharma 

red-hot 

Shudhi-shasira. 



P. L. 


Incorrect. 


Correct 


172 21 


Curses 


curses 


175 13 


Mahavir Lord 


Lord Mahavir 


176 22 


jndna . 
he ' 


jnana ) 


179 15 


Hstipala 


Hastipala 


112 19 


can not 


cannot 


187 19 


purificartory 


purificatory 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Jan. 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 1 6066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



